Subject: Re: softdep
To: Bill Studenmund <email@example.com>
From: Matthew Orgass <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/19/1999 18:29:55
On Thu, 18 Nov 1999, Matthew Orgass wrote:
> And since a LKM does not work without the kernel, it would be
> considered a derivative work.
Actually, on further consideration, this is almost certainly *not* true
because of the limitations of copyright law (it only covers copying,
distribution, and modification). As long as the non-GPL module is not
distributed with the GPL program, it would not come under GPL. With Linux
LKMs there would still be the header issue and if it used inline code from
a header it would certainly be GPLed.
On the issue that started this: I agree that SOFTDEP should be enabled
by default once it has been appropriatly tested and that the header with
the alternate copyright should also be put in the gnu tree.