Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:48:37 -0600 | From | "Scott Preece" <> | Subject | Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers |
| |
On 2/15/07, Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@verizon.net> wrote:
> This definition seems to be a bit like nailing jelly to a tree in that so > far only one companies legal dept has pursued this to the point of > actually getting a court verdict rendered. That was the German ruling a > link was given to earlier in this thread(s). ---
The German decision did not go anywhere near the question of kernel modules. It was a nice victory that the court decided the license was enforceable, but the details of the license are still largely untested.
--- > ...
> I'm a bit like Clint Eastwood here, do you feel lucky? If not, then > please comply with the terms of the software you have chosen to base your > product on. ---
Note that it's not just "lucy", but "rich". Both sides would spend a LOT of money if this went to court in the US. And, of course, "the terms of the software [license]" are exactly what the case would be deciding. There wouldn't be a case unless the two parties had different views of the terms of the license.
--- > As you have been told here repeatedly, a distribution to > your customers of code that is based on the GPL'd kernel headers does > bring you into non-compliance with the terms of the GPL. You can do > anything you want in house, but the minute that code ships, that is > a "distribution" and the GPL applies in full force in that its all made > GPL, or you cannot legally ship it. I don't know how it can be said any > plainer than that. But of course IANAL, so talk to yours, please. ---
I also ANAL, but even so I can point out that your assertion and Greg KH's assertions do not have the force of law. Questions like "what is a derived work" and "what does 'unrelated' mean" in the license are just not black-and-white.
I don't like niggling about interpretation, either, especially with material that someone has contributed to the community; I think it's rude and possibly unethical and that not testing the limits avoids any danger of impropriety. But claiming it's clear what the license requires is simply misleading.
scott - 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/
| |