[linux-dvb] [Em28xx] MPL-licensed V4L kernel modules (em2880)
christophpfister at gmail.com
Tue Jul 10 12:55:46 CEST 2007
Am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2007 12:08 schrieb Markus Rechberger:
> On 7/10/07, Marcel Siegert <mws at linuxtv.org> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Markus Rechberger wrote:
> > > On 7/10/07, Jakob Petsovits <jpetso at gmx.at> wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, 7. July 2007, Markus Rechberger wrote:
> > > > > only my new sources are MPL licensed there; the v4l-dvb maincode is
> > > > > of course GPL.
> > > > > Even though it doesn't matter anymore the people who lead me to
> > > > > that step know how the code will get merged into the kernel now.
> > > > > It's out of the scope of linuxtv.org due useless delaying all that
> > > > > work.
> > > >
> > > > Er, excuse my baffledness, but how do you plan to get code merged
> > > > into the kernel if it isn't GPL?
> > >
> > > there's nothing to worry about, the modified target code is GPL again.
> > >
> > > > Also, mind that the GPL being viral means that any code which bases
> > > > on GPL sources must be GPL (or GPL compatible) as well. Afaik, the
> > > > MPL is not GPL compatible, so if you put your new code exclusively
> > > > under the MPL and at the same time use the GPL-licensed v4l-dvb
> > > > maincode as a base, you are violating the GPL.
> > > >
> > > > I am not a lawyer, of course. Please consult someone with good
> > > > insight, for example, the Software Freedom Law Center at
> > > > http://www.softwarefreedom.org/
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Jakob
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Em28xx mailing list
> > > > Em28xx at mcentral.de
> > > > http://mcentral.de/mailman/listinfo/em28xx
> > at least for my understanding, markus, please explain to me that,
> > if you use v4l/dvb core functions that are licensed GPL, your code IS
> > also GPL automatically, isn't it?
> > and, as you told before, why is there a need to intermediate license to
> > MPL?
> Marcel, sorry this code is out of the scope of linuxtv, it's simply
> none of your business; A solution has been discussed with Linus and
> Mauro already. I do not want that my code gets reused by the linuxtv
> project without my authority (eg preventing code stealing).
> I'd appreciate if that thread can discontinue at that part, the very
> few active linuxtv developers who participated at the merging threads
> forced me to go another way since I'm not interested in further
> delays, you guys already delayed it for more than 1 year.. so feel
> So in case of the few linuxtv devs I would say the code is not
> intended to get compiled;
> In case of endusers I'd say take the code use and test it and submit
> bugreports if there are any, I'm try to answer all the mails on the
> em28xx ML (only very few might be delayed for a certain amount of
Nice try, but I highly doubt that it'll work out. Your code is a derived work
of GPL'ed code (even using tricks like glue code doesn't help _per se_; not
to be derived work would mean that the code can reasonably work without using
any GPL-only bits ...).
So you can't prevent the copyright holders of the GPL'ed code you're using
from enforcing the license (except if they did some dual-licensing or gave
you explicit permission allowing you to use their code in this way).
More information about the linux-dvb