lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Reiserfs licencing - possible GPL conflict?
David Schwartz wrote:
> > you may not integrate it
> > into any kernel (or if not added to a kernel, into any software
> > system) which is not also a GPL kernel (software system)
>
> This is already prohibited by the GPL. In fact, most of the difference
> between GPL software and PD software is that GPL software may not be
> integrated with non-GPL software.

[I am not a lawyer].

This is not correct. GPL software may be integrated with a great deal
of non-GPL software. Aside from interpretation of "integrated", which
clearly does vary according to who is interpreting it*, there are many
licenses which are non-GPL but GPL-compatible.

* - We've seen differing interpretations of "integrated" in this thread
already.

The poor phrasing is a real problem: it's not just important what Hans
Reiser means. It's also important what redistributors of the software
believe it means. If they believe it means they are permitted to do
something that Hans intends they are not permitted to do, they might get
away with it. Or they might get sued for using it in an entirely
GPL-compatible way, but I hope we can rely on Hans not doing that.

I think the "may not be integrated with non-GPL software" clause is an
additional restriction that is not permitted by the GPL itself. The net
result is that the combined license is self-contradictory, and I believe
there is some legal method for resolving contradictions in licenses,
which may or may not nullify the "no additional restrictions" clause in
the GPL part.

Thus it is possible that someone can take Hans Reiser's code and
distribute it under non-GPL terms, contrary to his intention, because
the self-contradictory license is nullified in precisely the part that
protects the GPL terms on redistributions.

It is also possible that no-one is permitted to redistribute the code at
all, except the author. Unless you can satisfy the terms of the GPL
part of the license, you are not granted permission to redistribute.
With the additional restriction, you do not have that permission. The
author is exempt because he is permitted to slap on any license, even a
self-contradictory one.

If the overall license is not compatible with the standard GPL, and I
don't think it is, reiserfs as it stands cannot be incorporated into the
standard kernel. If it is done anyway, and generally accepted by many
of the authors, that would weaken the GPL's coverage of the entire
kernel: we would be seen to be endorsing Linux kernel redistribution
contrary to the "no additional restrictions" clause in the GPL.

-- Jamie

-
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 13:54    [W:0.153 / U:0.516 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site