Re: [PATCH] USB: mark USB drivers as being GPL only

[David Newall <davidn@davidnewall.com>]

Alan Cox wrote:
>> It's nonsense, it's a reasonable reading of the GPL.  What I am doing is
>> telling you what the GPL says, not what you wish it said.
>>     
>
> In which case for each statement please give the case at appeal or higher
> level which is the precedent for the interpretation.
>   

I am giving my opinion.  By contrast, you have claimed to be giving the
opinion of numerous lawyers.  I hate to be so blunt, but that is the
naked truth.  You could improve that situation.


>>> If the developers say that this symbol can only be used in GPL code (and
>>> with EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL it is quite clear) then you have to obey to that
>>> license or don't use this symbol at all.
>>>   
>>>       
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL is not a licence.  Only a licence is a licence.
>>     
>
> Export symbol is a guide. There is no reason to think that EXPORT_SYMBOL
> symbols alone mean your work is somehow not derivative.

No argument, other than with, "export symbol is a guide."   My argument
with that is that one could mistakenly infer that "export symbol"
includes "EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL."   The latter is not a guide, is it?  It
restricts a symbol from use by proprietary modules.