Re: [PATCH] 2.6.25-rc2-mm1 - fix mcount GPL bogosity.

[Krzysztof Halasa]

"David Schwartz" <davids@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I don't know who told you that or why, but it's obvious nonsense,

Correct.

> Exports should be marked GPL if and only if they cannot be used
> except in a derivative work. If it is possible to use them without taking
> sufficient protectable expression, they should not be marked GPL.

This isn't very obvious to me.

The licence doesn't talk about GPL or non-GPL exports. It doesn't
restrict the use, only distribution of the software. One is free to
remove _GPL from the code and distribute it anyway (except perhaps for
some DMCA nonsense).

If a code is a derivative work it has to be distributed (use is not
restricted) under GPL, EXPORT _GPL or not _GPL.

One may say _GPL is a strong indication that all users are
automatically a derivative works, but it's only that - indication. It
doesn't mean they are really derivative works and it doesn't mean a
module not using any _GPL exports isn't a derivative.

I think introducing these _GPL symbols was a mistake in the first place.
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa
--
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/