From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262437AbTFGAmi (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jun 2003 20:42:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262439AbTFGAmi (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jun 2003 20:42:38 -0400 Received: from pc2-cwma1-4-cust86.swan.cable.ntl.com ([213.105.254.86]:34452 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262437AbTFGAmh (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jun 2003 20:42:37 -0400 Subject: Re: help: use of third party kernel modules: license issue? From: Alan Cox To: J C Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Message-Id: <1054947225.17185.26.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 07 Jun 2003 01:53:45 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sad, 2003-06-07 at 00:57, J C wrote: > How does the Linux GPL license apply to third party, binary modules in > a case where our custom core kernel code uses proprietary, third > party, "binary only" module interfaces? Linux the kernel is subject to the GPL license. The GPL license is absolutely clear what it applies to, which is any derivative work. So the question you need to answer is "Is this a derivative work". For user space its easy and to be clear the kernel explicitly clarifies it doesn't regard user space as that. For kernel changes its a hard question and you need to ask someone who studies the issue - thats not a programmer (we just think we know ;)) but a lawyer.