Re: GPL-ed code in a driver for a proprietary OS

[<ctacke/>]

I've always considered that ambiguity a risk, and chosen not to use GPLed 
code.


-- 

Chris Tacke, Embedded MVP
OpenNETCF Consulting
Giving back to the embedded community
http://community.OpenNETCF.com


<richardlang@my-deja.com> wrote in message 
1194408782.801896.257450@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com">news:1194408782.801896.257450@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> Hi all,
>
> I'm wondering what the general consensus is on the legitimacy of using
> GPL-ed code in a driver for a proprietary operating system, in my
> particular case to generate a file system driver for Windows CE.
>
> I've had a good read of the GPL license and associated FAQs at www.gnu.org
> and trawled through various Usenet postings and it seems to me to be a
> bit of a grey area.  Regardless of how others might view things it is
> pretty clear that the opinion of the FSF is that the act of linking to
> a GPL-ed program, regardless of whether that linking is static or
> dynamic, creates a derived work that must also fall under the GPL
> license (and if this not the intent of the copyright holder they
> should maybe be using the LGPL instead), however there is a clear
> exemption allowing a GPL-ed program to use libraries/ components that
> are a standard part of the operating system for which the program is
> designed without the OS components falling under the GPL.  I'm
> wondering whether this exemption could be considered to work in the
> other direction, allowing a GPL-ed driver/module/plugin to be used by
> a proprietary OS.
>
>
> Thanks for your thoughts,
>
> Richard Lang.
>