Re: New licence and driver SDK ?

[Ed Cogburn <edcogburn@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 01:42:02PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> >
> > > Sven Luther wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > A new problem with the new licence was taken to my attention, concerning
> > > > the SDK. It seems some files of the SDK, which are linked with the
> > > > hardware drivers may be affected by the licence change, which would
> > > > preclude pure GPLed third party drivers.
> > >
> > > Linking doesn't constitute creation of derivative work. The resulting
> > > "combined work" (executable/tarball/bootable-image/CD/whatnot) is a
> > > compilation (see the statute), not a derivative work.
> > >
> > > http://www.digital-law-online.com/lpdi1.0/treatise27.html
> > > (see VI.D.4. Derivative Works and Compilations)
> > >
> > > Read also the following message (and the entire thread):
> > >
> > > http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7690
> > >
> > > <quote>
> > >
> > > No open source license can prohibit any licensee from creating
> > > proprietary combinations of independently-created proprietary
> > > and open source software that merely work together through APIs.
> > > Such combinations are not "derivative works" of software.
> > >
> > > </quote>


Of course the FSF's lawyers disagree with Rosen.  This is not an open and shut 
issue as you imply, it is still disputed.  We won't really ever know who's 
right until the GPL, and the linking issue, is tested in court. 
Unfortunately, every situation involving a perceived violation of the GPL that 
the FSF has pursued has resulted in the violators finding some solution to the 
problem short of going to court and testing the GPL.

_______________________________________________
Forum mailing list
Forum@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/forum