lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Dec]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Announce: DinX windowing system 0.2.0
In <199912280231.VAA07098@smarty.smart.net> Rick Hohensee (humbubba@smarty.smart.net) wrote:
> On the subject of licensing kernel modules differently that the kernel...

> Mike A. Harris
>>If it modifies ANY existing kernel source, it would be in
>>violation of GPL regardless of if it is linked monolithically or
>>modularly.

> The GNU GPL emphasis on sourcecode is so that you can remain in control
> of "the program", and so that the author can retain credit for creating it.
> The ultimate object of these concerns is the running program. The apparent
> emphasis on sourcecode is merely because that is usually crucial to
> maintaining control and accountability of "the program". It is perfectly
> feasible and not un-heard-of to create programs without a "sourcecode"
> phase. Such a program also has authorship rights that the GPL could be
> applied to.

> Kernel modules are utterly unified at runtime with the program in question,
> the Linux kernel, and are in no way a separate entity as pertains to
> authorship. If a user can't tell a module from an app, great. They don't
> write them. Whether modules modify kernel sourcecode is irrelevant, they
> are running in the same "process space", kernel space, with full and
> unrestricted access to the rest of the program they are an inate part of.
> I assume it's a rare module that references no kernel symbols. This isn't
> "linking", this is being the same program.

Hmm. I've never seen any linux program without usage of syscall's. Any call
via syscall does not make it part of kernel then. (Plese do not talk about
"process space", kernel space and so on -- there are no such terms in GPL).

> Kernel modules are utterly derived works of the kernel.

They are inserted in kernel in runtime via SPECIAL HOOKS (you can not just use
any symbol from kernel in module; it should be exported). It's the same thing
as userspace applicatoions doing (userspace applications are using numbers
while kernel modules using strings to name hooks -- it's irrelevant).

> The GPL requires that derived works of GPL'ed works be GPL'ed.

But kernel module is NOT derived work. It's using PUBLISHED interfece and
does not interfere with kernel internals (it can do this due lack of
protection but it's not relevant as well: with such logic you can not have
more then one program in DOS at all).

> The authors of GPLed works may make exceptions. I urge the authors of Linux
> to refuse and discourage requests for such exceptions, and to speak plainly
> about unauthorized violations.

Hah. They should PROVE IN COURT this :-) Not easy task Iwant to say...

> Rick Hohensee
> cLIeNUX user 0
> (rant about Winmodems deleted, believe it or not)





-
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 13:55    [W:0.053 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site