| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4922ED5A.3030808@shaw.ca> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:29:14 -0600 From: Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Developing non-commercial drivers ? Fredrik Markström wrote: > Linus, others... > > I'm working for as a consultant for a large hardware company porting > Linux to their new cpu-architecture and everything is pretty much > up and running. Now they want us to develop a closed-source (to > protect their IP) ethernet driver for their proprietary Ethernet MAC. > > My question is: Is there a fair way to do this and still comply to > the intent and spirit of the Linux licensing ? > > If yes, how ? In a word, I would say: no. When developing a non-GPL kernel driver, one finds themselves on very shaky legal ground. Unless one is 100% sure their code is not legally considered a derived work from the kernel, it's likely a GPL violation. One could point out the pile of other Ethernet drivers in the kernel from the likes of Intel, Broadcom, etc. and ask why those companies did not feel the need to "protect their IP" in this manner.. as well as the significant advantages of having their driver in the mainline kernel, and the horrible disadvantages of trying to manage closed-source drivers.. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists