Daniel J Blueman wrote:
> This depends if the module uses any symbols exported from the kernel
> with EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(), and clearly the module license - 'strings'
> should be enough do check this is you don't have a MIPS platform to
> hand.
Even then (I didn't check the binary yet), is it really legal to
distribute a kernel source tree which contains sources with statements
like the following?
/******************************************************************************
Copyright (c) 2002-2003 Inprocomm, Inc.
All rights reserved. Copying, compilation, modification, distribution
or any other use whatsoever of this material is strictly prohibited
except in accordance with a Software License Agreement with Inprocomm, Inc.
******************************************************************************/
This doesn't look exactly like GPL compatability to me, still it is
_within_ the kernel tree.
Note that I don't say they can't distribute a binary only module, it is
the fact that it is located _within_ the kernel tree that, ahem,
irritates me.
I wouldn't say anything if there would be a separate 'source' tree for
the proprietary module but: is distributing a kernel source with
proprietary binary code embedded really legal?
--
Andreas Steinmetz SPAMmers use [email protected]
-
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]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |