On Mon, 29 Jul 2002 16:26:07 PDT, Crispin Cowan said: > Valdis.Kletnieksat_private wrote: > > >Hint - why are nVidia's non-GPL drivers OK? Because I can download them, > >BUT I CAN'T DISTRIBUTE THEM. > > > I don't understand that: nVidia has distributed the drivers to you. If > the drivers hare GPL-tainted, then you have GPL rights to the nVidia > driver source. If they are not GPL-tainted, then the terms of the nVidia > drivers are whatever nVidia's EULA says. Right - and if the nVidia drivers have an EULA that has any additional restrictions above the GPL, I can't distribute a kernel that includes them. (The actual nVidia problem is that they are OCO - but any restriction or conflict would be similar... > ... and *that* is an extremely fine point of the law. It is a very > subtle interpretation to say that SCC was "employed" by NSA when doing > the initial SELinux work, and therefore the movement of the GPL'd kernel > code did not actually involve "distribution". Even more subtle - there's nothing illegal about a contractor using a patent-encumbered technique in code they write, and leaving their employer to get a license for it before they can actually use the deliverables (which seems to be the boat we're in, actually ;) /Valdis
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Jul 29 2002 - 22:02:55 PDT