On Feb 06, 2006, at 16:07, David Schwartz wrote:
The LGPL deals with only derivative works. The GPL also deals with
mere *linking*. If glibc were GPL'd, it would be illegal to make
an OS based on it with a single C program incompatible with the GPL.
The only way the GPL can control work Y because it affects work Z
is because Y is a derivative work of work Z. If it's not, then the
works are legally unrelated, and no matter what the GPL says, it
can't affect work Y.
To say this more simplistically, the LGPL essentially says "Even if
dynamic linking constitutes making a derivative work, we allow you to
dynamically link, so long as the rules are followed for the LGPL code
to which you link". The GPL essentially says "If dynamic linking is
making a derivative work, then these rules apply to the whole
derivative work and all of its constituent parts".
Whether or not an NVidia binary module is a derivative work is left
up to the courts to decide. It _may_ be legal (don't trust me,
consult your lawyer) to have a very simple cross-platform interface
and some BSD-licensed glue. On the other hand, if your interface
derives from or exposes any kind of kernel-internals, then it is most
certainly a derivative work (because you can't argue that the binary
interface was written to be independent of Linux, and it therefore
falls under the GPL.
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
--
Unix was not designed to stop people from doing stupid things,
because that would also stop them from doing clever things.
-- Doug Gwyn
-
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]
