lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario
    On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 05:20:16PM -0800, Tim Bird wrote:
    > This interpretation puts kernel developers in the
    > position of making the legal decision about which

    An hint can hardly defined as a "legal decision".

    An hint _only_ means "be careful you _might_ be illegal".

    "might be" is hardly a "legal deicision", infact it's not decision at
    all.

    It's like a "you should check your stuff to be sure you're ok".

    This is the way I understood it at least...

    > Different developers are likely to have
    > different viewpoints on which interfaces pose risks.

    The way I understood it, is that you may be breaking the GPL even if you
    don't circumvent any _GPL tag. You've to check your stuff yourself, and
    if you have troubles because of a _GPL tag, it means you must check it
    even more closely because you got an explicit _warning_. A warning isn't
    a "legal deicsion", it's just a warning.

    > I guess Linus gets the last call (as usual),
    > so there's some possibility of some amount
    > of uniformity here.

    agreed.

    > Most kernel developers will naturally tend
    > towards making more symbols EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL,
    > whether there's valid legal basis for it or not.

    Could be, but then those developers would be wrong. We're not required
    to make a symbol as _GPL to make the module illegal. So we should be
    reasonable.

    > (Please let me know if there's a lawyer somewhere
    > reviewing the insertion of EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPLs)

    I don't think there is one, and there needs to be no one, because the
    _GPL tag is not a legal decision, is an hint given from programmers to
    lawyers. Programmers may be totally wrong, but we do our best to help on
    the legal side too.

    > David currently suggests that *all* interfaces
    > be so designated. I suspect he strongly believes
    > that any use of a kernel interface creates a
    > derivative work. I have a different opinion.

    This question I don't want to answer because I'm a programmer, this
    requires a lawyer because this is the real _legal_decision_: what is a
    derived work of the kernel is the only thing that decides what is legal
    and illegal.

    > Well, if it makes sense to have developers giving out legal
    > advice, then I guess so.

    ;) Of course I meant it makes perfect sense that it's _only_ an "hint".
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-12-06 02:38    [W:2.364 / U:0.308 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site