Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?

From: Filip Van Raemdonck
Date: Fri Dec 05 2003 - 13:15:09 EST

On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 09:35:52AM -0800, Hua Zhong wrote:
> > So far, I don't see any reason why a module that uses an
> > inline function provided via a kernel header could be distributed in
> > binary
> > format without being a "derived work" and thus bound by the GPL.
> Yeah, the same reason that XFS, NUMA, etc are derived works from Unix
> since they must include Unix header files.

Nope, they #include Linux header files - at least in their Linux version.
Even if one version does #include Unix headers, that does not mean
copyright to the rest of the code automatically belongs to the Unix
copyright holder.

And we're not even talking about source code; we're talking about
_binary modules_. Which do include object code which comes from GPLed
(inline) code; and are thus derived works.



We have joy, we have fun,
we have Linux on our Sun.
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