[lkml]   [2003]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?
Linus Torvalds <> wrote:

> In fact, a user program written in 1991 is actually still likely
> to run, if it doesn't do a lot of special things. So user programs
> really are a hell of a lot more insulated than kernel modules,
> which have been known to break weekly.

IMHO (and IANAL of course), it seems a bit tenuous to me the argument
that just because you deliberating break compatibility at the module
level on a regular basis, that they are automatically derived works.
Clearly the module interfaces could be stabilised and published, and if
you consider the instance of a single kernel version in time, that module
ABI *is* published and *is* stable *for that version*. Just because you
make an active effort to change things and actively *not* document the
ABI other than in the source code across kernel versions, doesn't
automatically make a module a derived work.

IMHO anyway.


Kendall Bennett
Chief Executive Officer
SciTech Software, Inc.
Phone: (530) 894 8400

~ SciTech SNAP - The future of device driver technology! ~

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [W:0.135 / U:15.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site