3 ms·

Couldn't they write proprietary software with an API, then modify (under GPL) the Kernel to call that API? Their modified kernel with API calls is GPL while th

by illys 7y ago

Couldn't they write proprietary software with an API, then modify (under GPL) the Kernel to call that API? Their modified kernel with API calls is GPL while they keep their trade secrets... Am I correct?

Miner49er 7y ago
I think so, this is what Google does with Android, but IANAL. But it seems the company hasn't been doing that, so even if they make the change now, their old code is still in violation of the GPL, and anyone they distributed it to has the right to request it.
- noir_lord 7y ago
  Nvidia with their binary driver as well, that's why the kernel marks it as 'tainted'.
  - cvs268 7y ago
    Isn't "tainted" in the Linux kernel used to flag the presence of binary blobs? (and nothing to do with licensing) All binary blobs in the Linux kernel aren't automatically illegal according to the GPL, right? Binary blob kernel modules, in fact, have restricted access to the kernel frameworks (cannot access/use GPL symbols).
- slrz 7y ago
  > I think so, this is what Google does with Android, but IANAL. Google doesn't ship any proprietary kernel code as part of Android. It's all GPL and available to the public at large. Some Android kernel parts are maintained separately from the kernel.org mainline tree (i.e. they maintain a fork) but that's not a legal issue (and they're getting better at it anyway).