> However, any driver which makes use of Linux-kernel-specific interfaces, which are not found in other OSs (even in other Unix-like kernels) are, pretty much b

> However, any driver which makes use of Linux-kernel-specific interfaces, which are not found in other OSs (even in other Unix-like kernels) are, pretty much by definition, a "work based on the program" of the kernel and therefore must be licensed similarly GPLv2 defines a "work based on the program" thusly: "a "work based on the Program" means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another language" To be a derivative work of another work under US copyright law the work must contain sufficient copyrightable elements copied from that other work to require permission from the owner of that other work's copyright owner. If all you've copied is a few function names and data structure layouts in order to call those functions that seems unlikely to be enough to make your work a derivative work. It doesn't really matter whether or not those functions do things found in many other works or just one, because you aren't copying the functions themselves. > Note that the LGPL exists specifically to allow the linking of separate Free and proprietary software, which is forbidden by the GPL. Linking GPL and proprietary software together is not forbidden by the GPL. If you do so though GPL imposes requirements on you if you distribute the result, and those requirements will likely be impossible to meet. If you are just linking the GPL and proprietary software for you own use GPL does not care.