Messages in this thread | | | From | Kyle Moffett <> | Subject | Re: GPL only modules | Date | Sun, 17 Dec 2006 11:25:01 -0500 |
| |
On Dec 17, 2006, at 08:54:17, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Dec 16, 2006, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote: >> Do you REALLY believe that a binary becomes a "derived work" of >> any random library that it gets linked against? If that's not >> "fair use" of a library that implements a standard library >> definition, I don't know what is. > > Some disregard the fact that header files sometimes aren't just > interface definitions, but they also contain functional code, in > the form of preprocessor macros and inline functions, that, if > used, do make it to the binary.
I would argue that this is _particularly_ pertinent with regards to Linux. For example, if you look at many of our atomics or locking operations a good number of them (depending on architecture and version) are inline assembly that are directly output into the code which uses them. As a result any binary module which uses those functions from the Linux headers is fairly directly a derivative work of the GPL headers because it contains machine code translated literally from GPLed assembly code found therein. There are also a fair number of large perhaps-wrongly inline functions of which the use of any one would be likely to make the resulting binary "derivative".
On the other hand, certain projects like OpenAFS, while not license- compatible, are certainly not derivative works. The project was created independently of Linux and operates on several different operating systems, so even though it uses the very-Linux-specific keyring interfaces under 2.6, no GPL licensing could possibly apply.
> The gray area between what is clearly permitted by a license and > the murky lines that determine what constitutes a derived work, and > what is fair use even if it's a derived work, is not for any of us > to decide. The best we can do is to offer interpretations on intent > of license authors and software authors, and of laws. Even though > we're not lawyers or judges, such interpretations may be taken into > account in court disputes.
I agree, and I think that this thread has outlived its useful life.
Cheers, Kyle Moffett
- 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/
| |