From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266138AbTLaGbE (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Dec 2003 01:31:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266139AbTLaGbE (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Dec 2003 01:31:04 -0500 Received: from cimice4.lam.cz ([212.71.168.94]:36992 "EHLO beton.cybernet.src") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266138AbTLaGbB (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Dec 2003 01:31:01 -0500 Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 07:31:01 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Karel_Kulhav=FD?= To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Compatibility of Nvidia NVNET driver license with GPL Message-ID: <20031231073101.A474@beton.cybernet.src> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i X-Orientation: Gay Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello I faintly remember reading some article on the Net from Linus Torvalds stating something like if a piece of code is written specifically for Linux kernel, it must be under GPL. I have got an nVidia NForce2 board and downloaded their Ethernet driver (nvnet) and they say in README: "the network driver provided by NVIDIA is subject to the NVIDIA software license". How is with compatibility of such a behaviour with GPL of the kernel sources? Cl<