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

--1041485860505
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

"or later" perhaps copyright could be defined, and headers added to derivative?

Dean. Three ways to kill yourself, and ive been drove in one...

On 02 Jan 2003 01:57:01 +0000 Alan Cox <[e-mail]> wrote:

--1041485860505
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Received: from irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk ([213.105.254.86]) by smtp.cwctv.net  with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.447.44);
	 Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:11:49 +0000
Received: from irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h021v3HZ022623;
	Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:57:04 GMT
Received: (from alan@localhost)
	by irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id h021v1Nc022621;
	Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:57:01 GMT
X-Authentication-Warning: irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk: alan set sender to [e-mail] using -f
Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
From: Alan Cox <[e-mail]>
To: Paul Jakma <[e-mail]>
Cc: Rik van Riel <[e-mail]>, [e-mail],
   Linux
	Kernel Mailing List <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-10) 
Date: 02 Jan 2003 01:57:01 +0000
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-Path: [e-mail]

On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 00:31, Paul Jakma wrote:
> So I am not quite sure on what basis one could argue the NVidia 
> driver is not a derivative work, and hence it seems to me the NVidia 
> driver is technically in material breach of GPL.

I would assume Nvidia's view is based on US caselaw on what constitutes
a 'derived work'. The boundaries of copyright are not set by the GPL
authors

--1041485860505--