VMware GPL Enforcement Suit in Germany Continues

Re:VMware GPL Enforcement Suit in Germany Continues by tzs on Wednesday October 28, 2015 @03:54PM (#10466904)

> Some features only exposed as GPL-only as their usage clearly prove that driver is derivative work of kernel.

The marking or not marking of things as GPL-only has no affect on whether or not using those things makes the using thing a derivative work. Whether or not X is a derivate work of Y is determined by how much of Y's copyrighted expression is incorporated into X.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:VMware GPL Enforcement Suit in Germany Continues by SXX on Wednesday October 28, 2015 @04:18PM (#10467089)

Thanks for clarification. Sadly I'm not an expert in copyright law and post of "jnky" about GPL_ONLY probably explain better what I attempted to say.

What I wanted to say is that GPL_ONLY exist and does what it's intend to do: make it clear to driver maintainers (Nvidia as GPU vendor) that certain functionality shouldn't be used within proprietary code.

Of course this isn't actual legal limitation, but Nvidia also want to have open source drivers for Tegra and certainly don't want to get a finger on their next pull request.

[ Parent | on HN ]