RE:Re: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source

Andre Hedrick (
Tue, 31 Dec 2002 23:38:58 -0800 (PST)

On Wed, 1 Jan 2003 wrote:

> They are stealing by changing GPL files, and not giving the source, its

Before you call Nvidia a "THEIF", look in the mirror and read the legal
license associated with the drivers you have, and you do not have

The attached EULA is what you forgot to read, or maybe forgot understand.

International Offices
Theale Court, 11-13 High Street
Theale, Reading, Berkshire, RG7
Tel: +44 (118) 903 3000
Fax: +44 (118) 930 5691

> not for personal use so they are DISTRIBUTING it, and INCLUDING IT. BUT
> they dont give out their DERIVED source. I work with C everyday and when
> you put in a header file you are including it, all kernel headers are

Well recall you said it was time for you to consult your
"lawyer"/"solicitor", well lets see if I can help you do it faster.
I am tired of your rants about NVIDIA and the commerial viability of
binary library objects with public source wrappers.

With any luck you can be the person to win or loose the case and make GPL
viable or not.

Are you willing to take the risk?


Andre Hedrick
LAD Storage Consulting Group

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at