From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfgang Grandegger Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: add explicit copyright to header can/netlink.h Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2013 21:46:56 +0200 Message-ID: <522CD430.1020009@grandegger.com> References: <1378477811-3606-1-git-send-email-mkl@pengutronix.de> <20130906193744.GV24802@pengutronix.de> <522AFEA8.3020303@hartkopp.net> <522AFF20.6000501@pengutronix.de> <3cfa97cc2473a26f5f961bfb4560acd0@grandegger.com> <522CCB73.3090504@hartkopp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ngcobalt02.manitu.net ([217.11.48.102]:58090 "EHLO ngcobalt02.manitu.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751143Ab3IHTrB (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Sep 2013 15:47:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <522CCB73.3090504@hartkopp.net> Sender: linux-can-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Oliver Hartkopp Cc: Marc Kleine-Budde , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=F6nig?= , linux-can@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de On 09/08/2013 09:09 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > On 07.09.2013 21:15, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> On Sat, 07 Sep 2013 12:25:36 +0200, Marc Kleine-Budde > > >>> The usage of netlink.h in a closed source app might be a nother usecase. >> >> >> >> The intention is clear. But many other uapi include files are used in >> >> closed source as well without such a clause. >> >> >> >> Are you/we sure that this addition is even compatible with the >> >> GPL (v2) license. GPL does usually not allow exceptions. > > As original author you may chose the license as you like. > > That's why our license header intends to be like a BSD license and when used > inside the Linux kernel the GPL comes into action: > > * Alternatively, provided that this notice is retained in full, this > * software may be distributed under the terms of the GNU General > * Public License ("GPL") version 2, in which case the provisions of the > * GPL apply INSTEAD OF those given above. > > And then - just to make it really sure - this additional sentence is written: > > * The provided data structures and external interfaces from this code > * are not restricted to be used by modules with a GPL compatible license. The question is if this sentence is a legal addition to the GPL license. I personally doubt but I'm not a lawyer. Wolfgang.