Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 7 Sep 2000 04:31:00 -0400 (EDT) | From | "Mike A. Harris" <> | Subject | Re: Is it OK to release non-GPL network driver with source? |
| |
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
>Experts on legal stuff and copyright you won't find here, I'm afraid. > >May I ask why not GPLing the driver? You could for example state that the >code is under GPL for use in the Linux kernel only,
Not possible. The GPL explicitly states that you may NOT make additional restrictions. You can release the code under GPL "for the linux kernel", however if it is GPL, *NOTHING* prevents someone from taking that GPL code and turning it into a GPL Windows driver or GPL BeOS driver, etc...
You can not add additional requirements to GPL licenced code without voiding the GPL licencing. Sure, you can state whatever you like in your text files, and you can claim restrictions to the GPL, but the GPL document itself (COPYING) will contradict what you're saying, and explicitly states if there are contradictions, that the GPL is void.
If someone makes something GPL, they put the COPYING file in, and make comments in the code that it is GPL. Thats it. If they need to clarify anything at all, then they should not consider GPL at all because they are likely to make "additional restrictions" which are expressly prohibited by the GPL.
They can take the GPL licence text, modify it how they see fit, and call it the "Something Else Public License" if they like, then it wont be subject to the GPL's wording. This however might infringe upon GNU's copyright on the GPL document itself, so a complete license rewrite may be in order.
In general however, people in the open source community tend to avoid drivers and code for the kernel that are not GPL, due to the air of questionability behind them, and other similar reasons.
>even distribute under the GPL and some other license at the >same time. By giving the Linux community the right to modify >and redistribute the result it will benefit from the general >work on drivers to port them forward and fix bugs.
That is certainly possible, however I've seen other code put out that states "This is the Linux version which is under the GPL license. You may use this code with the GPL license in Linux only."
That just simply doesn't work. The GPL does not allow you to say that code is "for Linux only". You can say it, but saying it and using the GPL doesn't mean that the contradiction of wording is allowed all of a sudden.
TTYL
-- Mike A. Harris | Computer Consultant | Capslock Consulting Linux Advocate | Open Source Advocate | Red Hat Linux Fanatic Are you an open source developer? Need web space? Your own project mailing lists? Bug tracking software? CVS Repository? Build environments? Head over to http://sourceforge.net for all of that, and more, for free!
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |