lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]   [less markup]   [headers]   [forward]  
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: GPLv3 Position Statement
FromAlan Cox <>
DateWed, 27 Sep 2006 13:19:00 +0100
Ar Mer, 2006-09-27 am 10:58 +0200, ysgrifennodd Jan Engelhardt:
> I think Linus once said that he does not consider the kernel to 
> become part of a combined work when an application uses the kernel.

COPYING top of the kernel source tree.

> I tend to agree, it's gray (unless Linus explicitly colorizes it) -- 
> IIRC the GPL allows a GPL and closed program to interact if they do so 
> using 'standard' interfaces, i.e. passing a file as argument, or 
> shell redirection, communicating over a pipe or a socket, etc.
> But OTOH, linking code makes it a combined work.

No. The definition of a derivative work is a legal one and not a
technical one. Take a look at the history of the objective C compiler
front end for gcc. It is possible that linked code is not derivative or
pipe using code is derivative - consider for example RPC. Simply making
a linux device driver make the same function calls to the kernel by RPC
messages over a pipe type device would not change its status.

Alan

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-09-27 09:57    [W:8.574 / U:0.260 seconds]
©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans