Re: [PATCH] USB: mark USB drivers as being GPL only

[Alan Cox]

> > IANAL, but when looking at the "But when you distribute the same 
> > sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the 
> > distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License" of the 
> > GPLv2 I would still consult a lawyer before e.g. selling a laptop with a 
> > closed-source driver loaded through ndiswrapper.
> 
> Don't ignore, "mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program
> with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a
> storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the
> scope of this License."  Static linking certainly makes something part
> of the whole; dynamic linking doesn't.

Wrong again. You really are quite amusing. The test is "derivative works"
not linking. Linking is a meaningless (in law) computing term with no
place. Legal precedent for combining of works is drawn from things like
shipping a book and a commentary on the book together, putting music to
films, putting photos in a book. These are not "linking"

And I know what the lawyers I've talked to have said about the case of
shipping proprietary modules with the OS. Its a pretty definite "bad idea"

Alan

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/