On Wednesday February 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 2/14/07, Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We seem to have different definitions of open and closed. > > Open = 3rd party Linux drivers can be loaded. Closed = No third party > Linux drivers can be loaded.
Loading a driver is not at issue. Anyone may load a driver. The issue is when you *distribute* a driver. If that driver is a derived work or the Linux kernel, then you may only distribute it under the terms of the GPLv2, which essentially means that you make the source code available - under the GPLv2 - to everyone you give the driver to. How do you know if the driver is a derived work? Well, if it uses POSIX syscalls only, it isn't. (You can write USB drivers in user-space which do this). If it uses symbols exported with EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, then the author of the code which provides those symbols thinks that the driver is a derived work. If it uses EXPORT_SYMBOL symbols, then it is less clear what people believe, though there are certainly some who believe it will still be a derived work. But of course the person who's opinion really counts is the judge. So you need to get legal advice. NeilBrown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
