Re: Inaccurate reporting on GPL

[Nick Hill <nikhilwiz@xxxxxxxxx>]

Why is a GPL'ed broker module used in both the OSS (opensound.com) and
the NVIDIA modules? First, a GPL'ed module is loaded, then a binary
module, which accesses the kernel funcs thru the API of the broker, is
loaded? Is it only to keep up with the constantly changing Kernel API,
or is it to cover up their ass after they've raided the GPL? 

Nikhil.

On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 10:18:56PM -0800, Arun Sharma wrote:
> Linus Torvalds has made an exception here. It's still possible that 
> some other kernel contributor will sue the closed source guys.
> 
> Read some of Alan Cox's comments on LKML.
> 
> Linus rejects patches to linux kernel which add an API solely for
> the sake of a closed source module. Linus and GPL world's primary
> way of fighting closed source extensions is to not have a unchanging
> API. It keeps moving all the time. While this meets certain political
> goals, it also compromises some technical benefits.
> 
> 	-Arun
> 
> ----------------------------------------------
> LIG is all for free speech.  But it was created
> for a purpose.  Violations of the rules of
> this list will result in stern action.