Re: [PATCH] module: Clarify GPL-Compatible is OK

[Arend van Spriel]

On 04/07/2012 09:03 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> > You do not need to make dual licenses when licenses are compatible
> > with each other, and in fact at times this can confuse developers / legal.
>
> Firstly you are out of order touching the licensing tags of other vendors
> code. Absolutely and utterly. So nobody should for example be touching an
> Intel MODULE_LICENSE() tag without the say so of Intel legal.

As the patch also includes driver code that Broadcom contributed to the 
kernel, I am inclined to agree. But to me it is not clear whether the 
MODULE_LICENSE() tag holds a true legal value. How does it relate to the 
legal disclaimer that is (probably) in each and every source file?

Gr. AvS

--
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/