This message generated a parse failure. Raw output follows here. Please use 'back' to navigate. From devnull@lkml.org Fri Apr 26 16:08:57 2024 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.116.70.75]) by kylie.puddingonline.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h026ITo01231 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 07:18:29 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:08:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:08:45 -0500 Received: from smtp-outbound.cwctv.net ([213.104.18.10]:36138 "EHLO smtp.cwctv.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:08:43 -0500 Received: from cwctv.net ([172.16.33.42]) by smtp.cwctv.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.447.44); Thu, 2 Jan 2003 06:12:36 +0000 From: To: david.lang@digitalinsight.com, paul@clubi.ie, riel@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rms@gnu.org Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 06:16:31 +0000 Subject: RE:Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers? Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Liberate TVMail 2.6 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="1041488191426" Message-Id: <0a5713612060213DTVMAIL4@smtp.cwctv.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --1041488191426 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit in a way, yes. Dean McEwan, If the drugs don't work, [sarcasm] take more...[/sarcasm]. On Wed, 1 Jan 2003 17:08:26 -0800 (PST) David Lang wrote: --1041488191426 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from warden.diginsite.com ([208.29.163.248]) by smtp.cwctv.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.447.44); Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:21:00 +0000 Received: from wlvims01.diginsite.com by warden.diginsite.com via smtpd (for smtp.cwctv.net [213.104.18.14]) with SMTP; Wed, 1 Jan 2003 17:18:42 -0800 Received: from wlvexc02.digitalinsight.com ([10.201.10.15]) by wlvims01.digitalinsight.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-0U10L2S100V35) with ESMTP id com; Wed, 1 Jan 2003 17:19:08 -0800 Received: by wlvexc02.diginsite.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 1 Jan 2003 17:17:00 -0800 Received: from dlang.diginsite.com ([10.201.10.67]) by wlvexc00.digitalinsight.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Z9L0CVAR; Wed, 1 Jan 2003 17:16:51 -0800 From: David Lang To: Paul Jakma Cc: Rik van Riel , Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rms@gnu.org Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 17:08:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-Path: david.lang@digitalinsight.com well libc uses the kernel headers and basicly all userspace programs use libc so that makes oracle a derivitive work of the kernel?????? luckly that's not how things actually work. David Lang On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Paul Jakma wrote: > Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 00:31:13 +0000 (GMT) > From: Paul Jakma > To: Rik van Riel > Cc: Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rms@gnu.org > Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source > drivers? > > On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > Copyright law is pretty explicit about the situations the GPL > > applies to. If something can be reasonably considered to be a > > "derivative work" of a GPL work, the GPL applies and the new work > > needs to be GPL. > > and: > > > but only a song. If nvidia's driver only uses some simple > > declarations from include files and no large (>7 lines? >10lines? > > what's large?) inline functions AND the nvidia driver uses only the > > standard interfaces to hook into the Linux kernel, then it's not a > > derivative work and nvidia gets to choose the license. > > It has long been held that linking to GPL code is suffient to > consitute 'derived work' status, hence the existence of the LGPL. > > The NVidia shim makes use of several kernel subsystems, the PCI > device layer, the VM, the module system (well really, the kernel > makes of use of the functions the module provides :) ), IRQ > subsystem, the VFS, etc.. These systems are rather large bodies of > code - without which the NVidia kernel driver could not work. > > So I am not quite sure on what basis one could argue the NVidia > driver is not a derivative work, and hence it seems to me the NVidia > driver is technically in material breach of GPL. > > You seem to be basing your opinion on: > > "the nvidia driver uses only the standard interfaces to hook into > the Linux kernel" > > How are the standard interfaces not covered by the GPL? > > I know Linus' has often posted to l-k that he doesnt care about > binary only modules as long as they stick to the exported interfaces. > However, are all the kernel developers agreed on this? And if so, can > this exception be formalised and put into the COPYING file? If not, > then is NVidia not in breach of the kernel's licence? > > > Rik > > regards, > -- > Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A > warning: do not ever send email to spam@dishone.st > Fortune: > Programmers do it bit by bit. > > - > 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/ > --1041488191426-- - 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/