[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: MODULE_LICENSE usage

    On Aug 6 2007 17:53, Nathan Williams wrote:
    >I'm working on a driver for an ADSL modem which requires the use of a
    >binary library from the chipset manufacturer. All my source code is
    >GPL, [...]
    >I've given permission for the binary library file to be used with the GPL
    >source code and be re-distributed with it.
    >Is it correct to say that my driver is licensed under GPL with
    >additional rights to use the binary library file?

    [ Obligatory IANAL sticker. ]

    Clear case for me IMHO. If your code is GPL (and which you emphasize
    with MODULE_LICENSE(GPL)) and then link in a binary blob, then the
    combined work becomes GPL, and you are required to hand out sources for
    it, including for the blob.

    I won't mention the gray possibilities because it is just evil in the
    first place to begin with.

    >Additionally, I'm unsure of what is the meaning of
    >"GPL and additional rights" [GNU Public License v2 rights and more]

    I think (but I may be wrong) that e.g. "GPL+BSD" fall into this. (Which
    not change the fact that you are still obliged to comply with the GPL.)

    >Thank you,
    >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

    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: 2007-08-06 10:25    [W:0.020 / U:61.100 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site