> > How about the fact that when you load a kernel module, it is linked into
> > the main kernel image? The GPL explicitly states what needs to be done
> > for code linked in.
> >
> I've always wondered about dynamically loaded modules (and libraries for
> that matter). The standard IANAL, but I've talked to many to try to
> understand what is really legal, and I usually come up with the
> conclusion, it's just an interpretation of the law by the judge.
>
> If the user is loading the module (or library) and the distributer
> doesn't, then is the the user breaking the license and not the
> distributer?
I think this is probably what the lawyers are telling the graphics
card companies at the moment, the GPL is broken by the act of linking
and at what stage is the link considered to have happened, so if I
distribute a GPL or BSD licensed stub layer in source form, a big
binary blob that doesn't use any kernel interfaces except my stub
layer ones, and never distribute any of it with a kernel or linked
into anything, am I breaking the GPL on the kernel? all I'm doing is
releasing some source code and some binary image files, the user is
doing the linking by loading my code into their running kernel and
I'm not distributing my code with the kernel...
It'll be an interesting day in court... and maybe then derived work
will become nicely defined at least for one country....
Dave.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
