Kernel modul licensing issues

From: john smith (john.smith77_at_gmx.net)
Date: 11/30/03

  • Next message: Andries Brouwer: "Re: Disk Geometries reported incorrectly on 2.6.0-testX" 
    Date:	Sun, 30 Nov 2003 13:30:28 +0100 (MET)
To: "Linux Kernel Mailinglist" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>

    Hi folks

    I have some licensing issues with the linux GPL and the implications
    on a project which incorporates partial non-GPL code which I want
    to release as linux kernel module.

    I am well aware that there are many threads concerning binary only
    and non-GPL kernel modules but I cannot deduce a clear statement
    for my specific case from what I have already read. That's why I
    kindly ask you about your interpretation of the GPL in the following
    case.

    I have implemented a proprietary algorithm in user space which I'm not
    allowed to release under the GPL. From a _technical_ point of view I
    could compile the code as kernel module which offers a certain API.
    Note that the kernel module would have only very limited dependency
    on the kernel, i.e. apart from memory allocation functions (kmalloc,
    kfree, vmalloc, vfree) and potentially some "locks" (spinlock, big
    reader lock or rcu) the code is totally independent from the kernel.
    In particular it is not required to apply any patches against the
    kernel sources.

     From what I have read I'd conclude that it is ok to release such a
    kernel module under a non-GPL license since it can hardly be considered
    derived work and of course otherwise proprietary drivers also could
    not be released as non-GPL kernel modules.

    Well, the story continues. Assuming that having the algorithm
    implemented as non-GPL kernel module I want to implement a front-end
    which makes use of the algorithm's API and release this code under
    GPL. The frontend would have some more dependencies on the kernel
    code compared to the algorithm module (though I'd still consider
    it "edge" code) and it might involve small additions to existing
    kernel files (3 or 4 small functions maybe).

    As far as the interaction with the algorithm API is concerned the
    frontend submits kernel data structures to the algorithm module _but_
    since the algorithm has no declaration of kernel structures it does
    neither use nor modify the kernel data. It's just stored and returned
    to the user via certain API functions.

    So, given this scenario is it ok that the GPL frontend uses the non-GPL
    algorithm API without the requirement of making the algorithm GPL too?

    Thank you very much for your help.

    John 

    -- 
Neu bei GMX: Preissenkung für MMS-Versand und FreeMMS!
Ideal für alle, die gerne MMS verschicken:
25 FreeMMS/Monat mit GMX TopMail.
http://www.gmx.net/de/cgi/produktemail
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More! +++
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
  • Next message: Andries Brouwer: "Re: Disk Geometries reported incorrectly on 2.6.0-testX"

    Relevant Pages