Derived works

Posted Jul 15, 2021 23:56 UTC (Thu) by proski (subscriber, #104)
Parent article: GitHub is my copilot

Suppose that I'm converting my proprietary code to a Linux driver using Copilot or a similar system. Suppose that Copilot generates code that refers to symbols declared with EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL. In that case the kernel would be preventing my code from loading based on a flawed premise that my code is a derived work of the kernel and should be licensed under GPL. How can my code be a derived work if I haven't even looked at the kernel sources? Could be an interesting discussion in LKML.

Derived works

Posted Jul 16, 2021 1:16 UTC (Fri) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link] (1 responses)

> if I haven't even looked at the kernel sources

If you're doing that, I'd dare to say you've got a driver no one is interested in using because you're going to have to look at some code or documentation (that probably contains some code) at some point.

Anyways, `EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL` isn't about "you saw the code, now you're tainted". It's about "if you use this symbol, it is our opinion that you are relying on Linux so much that you must be derivative". There's no need for anyone to have seen the Linux code for that to take effect.

Derived works

Posted Jul 30, 2021 1:09 UTC (Fri) by mrugiero (guest, #153040) [Link]

And that's why libraries tend to use LGPL, because you don't need to read the code to be using it, and nobody will use it in a non-GPL project if they can't be sure it won't count as derivative.

Derived works

Posted Jul 16, 2021 13:41 UTC (Fri) by HIGHGuY (subscriber, #62277) [Link]

IANAL, but I would dare say that if you attempt to upstream such code you might be publishing code you do not have the right to publish for.
The legal issue would be yours, not the kernel’s.