On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 19:10 -0500, Evan Hisey wrote: > Karl- > They do have to make the GPLed code available. If they have made any > mod's to the code to get it to work on their hardware then those have > to be released.
Sorry this is a very primitive understanding of the GPL and its implications. The GPL is intended to protect developers rights when they open source it, not to force derivative works to assume the exact same licensing, thats what the MIT license does! For derivative works you are only required to provide the original code you derived yours from unless you use other bits of code inside of your code. Thats where it gets complicated. For instance if I take a methodology for one network card driver which IS GPL and insert that methodology in to my network driver then I'd either have to change that code or release it under GPL. This still doesn't mean I have to release ALL of the code, just the bits which put the methodology in context. Even in the most complicated GPL violations the burden of proof is on the FSF/EFF/GNU to prove it. This is exceptionally difficult, in most cases the accused with provide debugging symbols to a third party to prove innocence. > If they have written all new code under a different > lic. they can keep that. I just want to be able to get what I am > legally entitled too. Fact is, what you're entitled to is already available online! thats where they got it from. > I have to do the same thing when I am > distributing packages of GPLed code. That is why there is also a > source directory on my website for everything I distribute. As to RH > kernel patches those are binary modules Actually redhat made significant changes to the kernel memory handling in order to provide NX for shell code protected memory. They've also made significant changes to other parts of the core kernel, which are in fact patches against the kernel internals. They CAN'T be binary modules. The idea that redhat release drivers is absurd. They harden linux kernels, they have code patches to do this and don't release that source. Even though they are modifying GPL code they do not have to provide the modifications they are only required to provide the code which is already licensed to other developers. > ( like nvidia or ATI, Yes > there is a disubute about this but I fall on teh pragmatic side) not > actual source patches to the kernel. Any source patch to the kernel > would have to be GPLed. As explained above NO - IT - DOESN'T! GPL doesn't over ride patents or proprietary development, if it did you wouldn't be able to make money from it! > I suspect that the LCD driver is a binary > module or userland code, but till you have the source or a good distro > in this case,it is kind of hard to tell. It could be an echo script pushing chars at a standard parport driver. To summarise, GPL does not prohibit derivative works or restrict derivative works as long as credit is acknowledged where due. Code can be kept secret where ever the developers see fit, unless it violates an existing license on existing code (duplication/IP theft, eg. nvidia taking GPL code for memory management and putting it in their driver as happened recently), is not correctly credited or credit is stolen by another (eg. pearPC and cherryOS). The reason the posts were deleted is probably purely because asus don't want GPL upstarts having a go at them when they've already been burned once in the past. All they are required to do is respect the copyright holders, distribute the GPL or tell interested parties what license it is and where they can get a copy of it, and where the code they used can be obtained. K, ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Freevo-users mailing list Freevo-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freevo-users
