Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 05 Dec 2003 13:12:01 +0100 | From | Stefan Smietanowski <> | Subject | Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause? |
| |
Helge Hafting wrote:
> Ihar 'Philips' Filipau wrote: > >> GPL is about distribution. >> >> e.g. NVidia can distribute .o file (with whatever license they have >> to) and nvidia.{c,h} files (even under GPL license). >> Then install.sh may do on behalf of user "gcc nvidia.c blob.o -o >> nvidia.ko". Resulting module are not going to be distributed - it is >> already at hand of end-user. So no violation of GPL whatsoever. > > > Open source still win if they do this. Anybody interested > may then read the restricted source and find out how > the chip works. They may then write an open driver > from scratch, using the knowledge.
What I think he means is that nvidia.c only contains glue code and blob.o contains the secret parts just like the current driver from nvidia.
// Stefan
- 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/
| |