We talked at LWE '99 about this issue.
As you can see that this is getting to be a bigger mess as I predicted
more than a year ago. As you explained to me that IGEL had verbal terms
of agreement that the code returned to M-Systems was returned with a GPL
license in it placed by IGEL. M-Systems then remove the GPL license and
converted the code in to an object that violated the rules and spirit of
Since I discussed the with with Tim Ney and RMS at LWE '99, did IGEL
followup with legal docs to protect your position.
On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> email@example.com said:
> > I'm sure that once the FSF is willing to step up, there will be lots
> > of supporters and sponsors to finance this.
> Far smaller companies have _already_ got away with not only violating the
> Linux kernel's GPL, but blatantly encouraging their customers to do so.
> Why should we believe that anyone's actually going to pursue one as large
> as Microsoft?
> See http://www.m-sys.com/files/drivers/doc/DOC_linux_2_2_x.zip for a
> binary-only driver which comes with instructions on how to link it into
> your kernel - encouraging you to break the GPL.
> Note that it doesn't come as a loadable module (although it's possible to
> hack it a bit to do that). The instructions only tell you how to link it
> into your kernel - hence violating the GPL if you distribute your product.
> I believe that IGEL's products are shipping with the DiskOnChip driver in
> this form. Has anyone sued them yet?
The Linux ATA/IDE guy
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 07 2000 - 21:00:19 EST