Re: GPL Violation?

From: Adrian Bunk
Date: Fri Aug 18 2006 - 13:54:12 EST

On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 05:03:03AM -0400, Patrick McFarland wrote:
> On Thursday 17 August 2006 04:02, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > This is _your personal interpretation_ of what consists a "derived work"
> > under the GPL.
> > This is a known grey area that has AFAIK not yet been brought to court
> > in any country, and neither your personal opinion on this issue nor my
> > personal opinion on this issue can replace legel advice.
> And I never said anything different. Stop being hostile to other's opinions.
> LKML isn't the place for a flamewar.

You said:

<-- snip -->

Closed source modules are lame, and against the spirit of open source, but
that still doesn't make them against the license.

<-- snip -->

And exactly the question whether modules with not GPL compatible
licences are against the license is the grey area.



Gentoo kernels are 42 times more popular than SUSE kernels among
KLive users (a service by SUSE contractor Andrea Arcangeli that
gathers data about kernels from many users worldwide).

There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.
Benjamin Disraeli

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