Re: [PATCH] can: add explicit copyright to header can/netlink.h
From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Date: 2013-09-09 20:29:35
On 09.09.2013 22:01, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
On 09/09/2013 08:06 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:quoted
On 08.09.2013 21:46, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:quoted
On 09/08/2013 09:09 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:quoted
quoted
* The provided data structures and external interfaces from this code * are not restricted to be used by modules with a GPL compatible license.The question is if this sentence is a legal addition to the GPL license. I personally doubt but I'm not a lawyer.This is for the guys that like to put EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() anywhere to NOT do this here ;-)But this is something different. EXPORT_SYMBOLS is for kernel modules which are covered by the GPL license, even with the Volkswagen license... or have I missed something. My favorite would be the GPL v3 license ;).
Well yes. The text was originally retrieved from the kernel module. I'm still in doubt if it's a good idea to have the GPL license for the header files. It makes more problems than clarifications. IMHO the headers are no "program" in the terms of the GPL. If you go into linux/include/uapi/linux and say 'head *.h' you will not see that much GPL licensing as you would imagine. E.g. look at the wimax.h header file from Intel. Nice text but no GPL. Looks like that everyone is doing his own stuff here ... BR, Oliver