Re: GPL only modules

From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
To: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	Ricardo Galli <gallir@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GPL only modules
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:41:17 -0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <orlkl56lgi.fsf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86C272DA-23BA-4901-994D-6CABCC87A2DE@mac.com> (Kyle Moffett's message of "Sun\, 17 Dec 2006 11\:25\:01 -0500")

On Dec 17, 2006, Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com> wrote:

> On the other hand, certain projects like OpenAFS, while not license- 
> compatible, are certainly not derivative works.

Certainly a big chunk of OpenAFS might not be, just like a big chunk
of other non-GPL drivers for Linux.

But what about the glue code?  Can that be defended as not a derived
work, such that it doesn't have to be GPL?

If not, can the whole containing both the non-derivative work and the
source code providing the glue without which the whole wouldn't
fulfill its intended purpose be regarded as a mere aggregate, and thus
not be subject to the requirement that the whole be released under the
GPL?

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member         http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}