On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > no. but puttysc claims to be GPL'ed, which is quite stupid - I don't know of > any GPL compatible pkcs#11 implementation. (opensc is not - we use openssl... > and pkcs#11 header files (the original) are GPL incompatible too.)
As far as I checked GPLed application can load any module whose interface is standard (application independent) and free to use as long as it is not depended on specific implementation and the user responsible for specifying which module to load. I had a long discussion with FSF regarding this when Werner claimed that this is the reason of not integrating PKCS#11 into GnuPG. After I resolved this issue (took several months to get each response), I found out that this was not the reason :( So we forked the scdaemon into gnupg-pkcs11-scd. Anyway... PKCS#11 is free to use, a GPLed program that loads PKCS#11 provider can do so as long as it does not enforces a specific implementation. The PKCS#11 provider will not be considered as a derived work. After reaching to this conclusion, I asked the FSF contact to approve a final statement regarding standard interface plugins, but I never got this final response. Anyway, I am not a lawyer, but nobody can claim that a PKCS#11 provider is a derived work of an application. Alon. _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
