| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
LinkSys and binary modulesLinkSys and binary modulesPosted Oct 16, 2003 5:04 UTC (Thu) by pjm (subscriber, #2080)Parent article: LinkSys and binary modules
If the module lacks a free license, the kernel complains, but loads the module anyway. One could argue that this behavior is an explicit acknowledgment that closed-source modules are permissible. It is permissable to use GPL'd code with non-GPL'd additions: copyright law places no restriction on such private modifications. The above-mentioned code is useful for noting the presence such private modification. What is not permitted is to redistribute the copyrighted code other than under the terms of the GNU GPL [or, more generally, under the terms of any other license one has been granted by the copyright owner]. The behaviour of checking for a free license does not constitute permission to distribute a derived product of the kernel without licensing it under the GNU GPL.
(Log in to post comments)
LinkSys and binary modules Posted Oct 16, 2003 5:29 UTC (Thu) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] > It is permissable to use GPL'd code with non-GPL'd additionsYes. The GPL only covers distribution.
LinkSys and binary modules Posted Oct 16, 2003 9:57 UTC (Thu) by zmower (subscriber, #3005) [Link] So potentialy anyone who owns a LinkSys router could sue LinkSys for non-compliance with the GPL. I think (but IANAL) that the source for the binary module would have to be released if anyone did this. I'd defer to the FSF's judgement on this issue though as they have lawyers. And I don't have this hardware. I do have a Nvidia card (still getting my moneys worth out of a Geforce 256) but they seem to have thought about this issue much more than Linksys/Broadcom.I don't think this case has been good for linux though. If you have proprietry hardware and want to keep your drivers closed then you really are at best entering an area of shady legality. I wonder if xBSD will gain on linux from this? Nightmare scenario: Desktop BSD with drivers to run all kit but still runs GPL software. Wake up screaming nightmare: released by M$. Now that would be embrace and extend.
LinkSys and binary modules Posted Oct 16, 2003 18:22 UTC (Thu) by andrel (subscriber, #5166) [Link] As far as the legal system is concerned, the only people harmed by copyright infringement (that's what a GPL violation is) are the copyright holders. So the kernel authors could sue, but people who purchase the router can't.Binary drivers aren't in any of our long-term interest -- cases like this which push hardware manufacturers to publish the bus-level interface instead of crappy drivers are a good thing. If I wanted to be forced to use closed source drivers I'd run SCO or Microsoft, not GNU/Linux.
|
|
||||||||||||