lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, George Bonser wrote:
> QUESTION: Say IBM wrote their own mmap.c replacement with no GPL code in
> it. Can they distribute a binary kernel image made with that mmap.c
> without distributing the source to that small program?

The GPL is pretty clear. The GPL says it applies to the entire
program, not just to part of it. The GPL defines the entire program as
the program itself and anything linked into the program. The only
exception is for operating system libraries, which are allowed to be
linked into your program even though they may be non-free if you're on
Solaris or etc.

Thus the binary modules bit is shaky but arguable, since the code is not
actually linked into the kernel but, rather, loaded as a separate object
into kernel space via a standard API. mmap.c, on the other hand, is
definitely linked into the kernel and thus IBM cannot replace it with
a proprietary one without the replacement also being under GPL.

--
Eric Lee Green eric@linux-hw.com http://www.linux-hw.com/~eric
"Linux represents a best-of-breed UNIX, that is trusted in mission
critical applications..." -- internal Microsoft memo


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:46    [W:0.180 / U:0.700 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site