Re: MODULE_LICENSE and EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL

Taral
2001-10-19T15:36:29Z

On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 11:49:21AM -0400, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> I'm sorry. "module inserting" is LINKING. A kernel module does, in my
> oppinion, NOT fall under the gpl stated "mere aggregation" boundary of the
> GPL, it is compiled with kernel headers, contains kernel _code_ from these
> headers etc etc, and is for all intents and purposes part of the GPL program
> "kernel" once loaded. It uses normal function calls etc etc, symbols are
> resolved using normal linking mechanisms etc etc.

You're quite right. Module insertion is linking. And distributing a
kernel with binary-only modules already inserted would be a GPL
violation. What modules do is let people do the link at the last stage
-- the end user. The GPL does not restrict what end-users do with your
code if it doesn't involve redistribution.

In short: Copyright holders have the right to attempt to restrict their
interfaces. But end-users also have the right to ignore those attempts.
That is, unless the DMCA comes into play.

--
Taral <taral@taral.net>
This message is digitally signed. Please PGP encrypt mail to me.
"Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't
understand it." -- Florence Ambrose