On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 02:35:24PM -0800, Jeff Haran wrote:

I've seen others when faced with this who build their own kernels from
sources just modify the problematic EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()s to
EXPORT_SYMBOL()s. I don't know if that is legal. I wouldn't do it
personally. Consult a lawyer before you go down that road.

It is not legal and companies have gotten into big trouble by trying to
do that, or by creating "gpl-condom" kernel modules that wrap gpl-only
symbols and export them again.  Do not do that without the full buy-in
from your legal department as they do not want to hear about it from an
external query first.

This stuff is designed to encourage you and more specifically the
company you work for to declare your module as GPL and make it
available for others to use. That's how Linux grows. Convincing
management to do so can be quite challenging though. If your company
must keep its intellectual property private, they can always dump
Linux and use one of the BSD derivatives instead that aren't covered
by GPL.

Exactly, if you want to use Linux, you must abide by the license of it,
just like any body of software.  What would happen if you decided to
ignore the license of Microsoft's operating system?  :)

thanks,

greg k-h