linux-kernel - Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1171537256.5835.60.camel@frg-rhel40-em64t-03>
Date:	Thu, 15 Feb 2007 12:00:56 +0100
From:	Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@...e.fr>
To:	Mohammed Gamal <m.gamal005@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers

On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 12:51 +0200, Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> I am still a kernel newbie, and I am still not very much aware about
> the GPL vs. Non-GPL drivers debate. I personally think it'd be better
> that all drivers should be GPL'd but if that's the case, what would be
> the legal position of such vendors as ATI or NVIDIA who supply closed
> source drivers? Would it be illegal to use them?

Yeah, this is a recurrent debate, and the positions are mixed. Linus
said that the nvidia driver isn't developed only for linux but also for
windows, so it's not a true derivative of the kernel, so the GPL doesn't
really apply. But not everyone (I mean core developpers) fully agrees
IIRC.
But that's not the case with VJ's drivers, which are apparently solely
for linux, so should be distributed under the GPL.

	Xav

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/