Re: Possible GPL infringement in Broadcom-based routers

[Horst von Brand]

"Adam J. Richter" <adam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:

[...]

> 	I think you're missing the idea that that such drivers are
> _contributory_ infringement to the direct infringement that occurs when
> the user loads the module.  In other words, even for a driver that has
> not a byte of code derived from the kernel, if all its uses involve it
> being loaded into a GPL'ed kernel to form an infringing derivative
> work in RAM by the user committing direct copyright infringement against
> numerous GPL'ed kernel components, then it fails the test of having
> a substantial non-infringing use, as established in the Betamax decision,
> and distributing it is contributory infringement of those GPL'ed
> components of the kernel.

This is nonsense: If so, I'd be commiting a crime each time I fire up emacs
on Solaris (linking (GPLed) emacs to (propietary) libc in RAM). [Yes, just
an example; haven't done so for the best part of 5 years now...]

Besides, Linus has _explicitly_ said that binary (closed source) modules
are OK (under certain conditions). And AFAIU there was legitimate
discussion wether this particular excemption was required at al.
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                     Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria              +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile                Fax:  +56 32 797513
-
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/