> Note that Linus doesn't agree with that idea, which is why, for example, the > nvidia driver is allowed.
I think I'm confused -- in that case, wouldn't Linux be the larger work, and the driver be a work that's linked in? nVidia of course has the right to license their software however they like...? -js On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Ron Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > On 01/29/2009 05:27 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > [snip] >> >> Still, that's much easier than building proprietary or dual licensed work >> on top of GPL software. The FSF's interpretation is basically that anytime >> GPL licensed code is integral to the functioning of the larger work (dynamic >> linking, static linking, IPC, *anytime*) the larger work must be licensed >> under the GPL, effectively forbidding proprietary or dual licensed works >> from being built on it. > > Note that Linus doesn't agree with that idea, which is why, for example, the > nvidia driver is allowed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
