Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?

From: Paul Jakma (paulj@alphyra.ie)
Date: Wed Jan 01 2003 - 20:32:19 EST

On 2 Jan 2003, Alan Cox wrote:

> I would assume Nvidia's view is based on US caselaw on what
> constitutes a 'derived work'. The boundaries of copyright are not
> set by the GPL authors

indeed, and apparently its not at all a black-and-white area. to that
end, i'll point to the following thread:

        license-discuss@opensource.org/msg05725.html">http://www.mail-archive.com/license-discuss@opensource.org/msg05725.html

and the paper it links to, "derived software defined" (no idea whether
its accurate):

        http://www.pbwt.com/Attorney/files/ravicher_1.pdf

and as IANAL, i'll shut up now.

regards, 

-- 
Paul Jakma	Sys Admin	Alphyra
	paulj@alphyra.ie
Warning: /never/ send email to spam@dishone.st or trap@dishone.st

-
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/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 07 2003 - 22:00:16 EST