People, not GPL [was: Re: Driver Model]

Timothy Miller
2003-09-10T14:37:28Z

I'm still 1600 messages behind in reading the list, but I have spent
enough time reading the discussion about GPL and drivers that I feel
compelled to comment. I don't intend to comment further because I don't
want to contribute to a flamewar any more than this already will. But I
feel the need to defend those who contribute to Free Software against
those who don't.

The argument I have been reading has been centered around the idea of
working around the GPL to support binary-only driver and various other
things which are counter to the spirit of the GPL and Linux. But
someone who is trying to find a legal GPL loophole is not considering
the root of the situation and that the GPL is an effect, not a cause.

A point someone else made that I feel compelled to reiterate is that it
is the nature of the Linux development model and the attitude of the
developers which has made Linux what it is and has made you want to use it.

But I have another point. You are not dealing with a license here. The
license is there to satisfy lawyers and make clear the INTENT of the
authors. The keyword here is INTENT in that someone who has developed
something is telling you how they feel about the use of their work
which, under many circumstances, they could have chosen not to share
with you. What you are dealing with is real people who have put an
incredible amount of time and effort into developing Linux. Those
people, to whom you owe much respect for sharing their contributions,
have decided that their software should be used with certain
restrictions, that being the GPL. If you abuse Linux, it is not the GPL
that you are insulting, but the people who developed Linux.

The GPL_ONLY restriction for driver modules may seem unfair, but it is
far from it. There are both valid technical and philosophical reasons
for working that way. No one forces you to use Linux, and when you made
the choice to use it, you are entering into a community with a specific
philosophy. You know that philosophy in advance, so when you discover
that you have a restruction you don't like, you have no room to complain.

As someone said, if you want to write drivers for a UNIX which does not
have these restrictions, there are plenty of commercial UNIXes out there
that you have to choose from. The fact that they are perhaps less
popular is one reason why Linux developers do not want to imitate them.

So, the discussions about finding ways to make a non-GPL driver look
like a GPL driver and get away with it legally are all moot. The reason
you should not violate this is because the architects of Linux do not
want you to. If you choose to violate that, you are being unethical,
pure and simple. Or more to the point, you're being an asshole to a lot
of hard-working people who have chosen to freely share their work with
you. Since they are the authors and you are not, their feelings about
their softare are more important than yours. You may be able to screw
them over and get away with it -- people do that sort of thing all the
time -- but the fact that you may find a legal loophole doesn't make you
any less of an abject asshole.

In short: Be honorable.