Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?

From: David Woodhouse (dwmw2_at_infradead.org)
Date: 12/06/03

  • Next message: Filip Van Raemdonck: "Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?"
    To: karim@opersys.com
    Date:	Sat, 06 Dec 2003 00:08:31 +0000
    
    

    On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 01:25 -0500, Karim Yaghmour wrote:
    > Since the last time this was mentioned, I have been thinking that this
    > argument can really be read as an invitation to do just what's being
    > described: first implement a driver/module in a non-Linux OS (this may even
    > imply requiring that whoever works on the driver/module have NO Linux
    > experience whatsoever; yes there will always be candidates for this) and then
    > have this driver/module ported to Linux by Linux-aware developers.

    So you have a loadable module made of two sections; a GPL'd wrapper
    layer clearly based on the kernel, and your original driver. The latter
    is clearly an identifiable section of that compound work which is _not_
    derived from Linux and which can reasonably be considered an independent
    and separate work in itself.

    The GPL and its terms do not apply to that section when you distribute
    it as a separate work.

    But when you distribute the same section as part of a _whole_ which is a
    work based on the Linux kernel, the distribution of the whole must be on
    the terms of the licence, whose permissions for other licensees extend
    to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who
    wrote it.

    For the precise wording which I've paraphrased above, see ยง2 of the GPL.
     
    Note that 'is this a derived work' is only part of the question you
    should be asking yourself. The GPL makes requirements about the
    licensing even of works which are _not_ purely derived.

    Some claim that copyright law does not allow the GPL to do such a thing.
    That is incorrect. I can write a work and license it to you under _any_
    terms I see fit. I can, for example, license it to you _only_ on
    condition that you agree to release _all_ your future copyrightable
    work, including works of fiction and other completely unrelated things,
    under terms I decree.

    You either do that or you don't have permission to use my work. Whether
    your own work is derived or not is completely irrelevant; if you don't
    agree to the terms of _my_ licence, you don't get to use _my_ code.

    -- 
    dwmw2
    -
    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: Filip Van Raemdonck: "Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: masm32
      ... > Linux distro and tried to sell it as your own. ... (see section 1 of the gnu public license). ... My reading of this suggests that it applies only to circumvention (and ... > rip off one of the big reseach universities in the US but what put GPL ...
      (comp.lang.asm.x86)
    • Re: Wasting our Freedom
      ... Please take a moment to understand the Linux development process. ... removed the GPL license and dedicated the work to public domain or put ... You are so cleanly isolating and cutting away of a group of developers. ... between GPL and BSD developers. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Of mice and men
      ... > To talk about "Linux" is really a bit of a misnomer ... ... The GPL is the GNU Public License. ... The GUI look and feel for X-based systems is provided by a "window ...
      (comp.lang.cobol)
    • Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
      ... At every respectable linux user group there's somebody ... Let's tackle on the only real _tangible_ problem of gplv2 known ... Frankly I think we all love the FSF and the GPL and we want to ... cannot be obtained in this world, no matter what license or system you ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Wasting our Freedom
      ... Please take a moment to understand the Linux development process. ... removed the GPL license and dedicated the work to public domain or put ... accepted into the Linux Kernel, so this is *NOT* the place to send mail ... some GPL code and replaced the license with BSD. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)