Re: incorrect taint of ndiswrapper

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Oct 25, 2006, at 16:30:26, Alan Cox wrote:
Ar Mer, 2006-10-25 am 16:11 -0400, ysgrifennodd Pavel Roskin:
I don't see any legal reasons behind this restriction. A driver under GPL should be able to use any exported symbols. EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL is a technical mechanism of enforcing GPL against non-free code, but ndiswrapper is free. The non-free NDIS drivers are not using those symbols.
The combination of GPL wrapper and the NDIS driver as a work is not  
free (in fact its questionable if its even legal to ship such a  
combination together).
Assume the existence of two programs, Foo and Bar (ndiswrapper and  
vendor-NDIS-driver).  If Foo and Bar are different licenses (GPL vs  
proprietary) it is not legal to distribute them as part of a single  
work unless you convince the copyright owners to relicense.  It _is_  
however, perfectly legal for an end user to download Foo from and Bar from and combine the two on his  
computer, whether or not that does anything useful.  Since the  
ndiswrapper driver was not based on any particular driver but on a  
defined standard, using ndiswrapper with a proprietary NDIS driver is  
just as legal as using a proprietary database server on a GPLed Linux  
system.  The technical issues of which ring the code runs in is  
irrelevant as long as the user obtained both pieces separately and  
neither is a derivative work of the other.
Besides, if the user does not distribute it then copyright law is  
Kyle Moffett
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[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]
  Powered by Linux