Re: nvidia fb licensing issue.

From: Dave Airlie
Date: Tue Mar 15 2005 - 05:33:40 EST

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005, Jon Smirl wrote:

> All of the files in drivers/char/drm really should have an explicit
> dual MIT/GPL license on them too. The DRM project has been taking
> patches back into DRM from LKML without making it clear that DRM is
> MIT licensed. It might be construed that doing this has made DRM GPL
> without that being the intention.

They all have explicit MIT licenses on them, these files are only
dual-licensed by the fact that they are shipped with the kernel, but they
are MIT licensed and I would consider any changes to them to be MIT
licensed unless someone explicitly states it..

Similiar to the reiser notice on top of those files.. I think MIT license
is explicit enough...

Some files are GPL licensed like drm_sysfs as it is obivously derived from
GPL code,


David Airlie, Software Engineer / airlied at
Linux kernel - DRI, VAX / pam_smb / ILUG

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at