From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jon Smirl" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] Net: ath5k, license is GPLv2 Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:01:34 -0400 Message-ID: <9e4733910708291101i3783a8b1l38f0d5cfb0c2863d@mail.gmail.com> References: <2713029743177393055@pripojeni.net> <7515194658758617@pripojeni.net> <20070828171155.GC29343@infradead.org> <3208.1188408545@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Christoph Hellwig" , "Jiri Slaby" , linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: "Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu" Return-path: Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.224]:26910 "EHLO nz-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751556AbXH2SBg (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:01:36 -0400 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s18so222426nze for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:01:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3208.1188408545@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 8/29/07, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > The heck with "good idea" - it's unclear to me if Jiri is even *allowed* > to remove the BSD/other license. Jiri can release *his* code as GPLv2 > only, but I suspect the files as a whole really should be dual BSD/GPLv2, > due to the numerous other stakeholders in those files. This mess has been occurring in the kernel for years. The DRM graphics drivers are used in both BSD and Linux. It is quite easy to contribute something to this code via LKML and think you are doing it under the GPL. Doesn't a patch against the kernel have to be GPL? When these patches get pulled back into BSD and distributed with it, did BSD get infected with the GPL? AFAIK this has never been legally sorted out. -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@gmail.com