Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:08:30 -0700 | From | Ben Greear <> | Subject | Re: Module Licensing? |
| |
"Kevin D. Wooten" wrote: > > After reading the posts about the MODULE_LICENSE macro, I am in disbelief. I > was under the impression that one could write a "closed-source" module and > distribute it in binary form, and be in compliance. Please tell me I am > wrong? We use Linux as a platform for some data acquisition, and we are > currently distributing ( in very limited quantity to people who would already > have signed an NDA ) modules that currently have no official license as yet. > We are researching which license to use, but according to these post's we > have almost no choice, Open Source or not at all!
No, you just can't use certain symbols if you're not GPL. If your code already works, then you're fine, as previously existing symbols will not be thus restricted... You can just make your MODULE_LICENSE == "mine-all-mine...including-all-my-bugs"
Ben
> > -kw > - > 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/
-- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com> President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear - 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/
|  |