Re: more files with licenses that aren't GPL-compatible

[Helge Hafting]

On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 04:34:25PM -0400, Erik Harrison wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 21:11:00 -0700, David Schwartz <davids@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > >     Permission is hereby granted for the distribution of this firmware
> > > >     image as part of a Linux or other Open Source operating
> > > >   system kernel
> > > >     in text or binary form as required.
> > 
> >        They can't grant that permission. Every single person who had contributed
> > to the Linux kernel would have to agree. The GPL prohibits including
> > software that isn't itself GPL'd from being combined with GPL'd software.
> > The issue is not permission to distribute this driver, the issue is
> > permission to distribute the *kernel*. The kernel's license prohibits
> > distrubiting it in combination with works that have licenses more
> > restrictive than the GPL.
> 
> That better be bogus, or else vendors are going to be very upset that
> they can't ship the kernel with, say, trademarked images. For example,
> Mozilla's trademark on their artwork is fairly restrictive, or the
> Mandrake Firewall product (if that's even still around - I don't keep
> up).

Not bogus, but the solutions are simple:

1. don't _link_ the proprietary file into the kernel, ship firmware & logo
as separate files along with the distro.  No problem.

2. Release drivers under the GPL instead of restrictive licence,
provide GPL'ed logos instead of the trademarked ones.

Helge Hafting
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/