On 02/22/2018 11:17 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 10:42:17AM +0100, Krzysztof Opasiak wrote:
On 02/22/2018 10:32 AM, Ran Shalit wrote:
I don't know the exact case nor I'm license specialist but I think it's
doable without license violation. Take a look at official displaylink
drivers... They consist of two parts. First one is Kernel GPL code
which is obviously published to not violate the license and second part is
userspace binary blob that receives video stream from this "open source
driver" and then uses libusb to communicate with the device...
1 - http://www.displaylink.com/downloads/ubuntu
2 - https://github.com/DisplayLink/evdi
Krzysztof , I will check the proxy git .
What's the difference between the proxy you've given before to the DisplayLink?
Displaylink driver is unrelated to the proxy. It's just an example of how to
not violate GPL license and not publish your USB protocol and provide only
binary blob with it;)
Um, do not say "how not to violate GPL" without being a lawyer please.
You are absolutely right and what I wrote above it's only my own
"feeling" not any lawyer statement.
I wouldn't bet that what they are doing is all so cut-and-dry...
Me neither so I'm only letting know that such things are happening in
the wild and if you know some specialist you may let him know about
this;) If it turns out that it's bad and you/LF manage to persuade DL to
open their driver because of that, then oh man you are a magician for me:)
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html