4 ms·

The title makes it sound as though this has been accepted into the Linux kernel when in fact it has not been. It is designed to work with the Linux kernel but i

The title makes it sound as though this has been accepted into the Linux kernel when in fact it has not been. It is designed to work with the Linux kernel but it is in no way associated with Linux. FUD much?

synchronise 13y ago
I've updated the title to hopefully dispel any unintended interpretations.
gngeal 13y ago
Did Samsung, in fact, distribute the code in Android devices? If the answer is "yes", wouldn't that make it GPLd?
- Nursie 13y ago
  Not necessarily, no. There is a long history of people releasing closed source drivers, particularly on embedded platforms. So far as I can tell the kernel devs think it's harmful and A Bad Thing (TM), but not a violation. Also as has been pointed out below, it wouldn't automatically make it GPL. It would make it in violation of GPL and releasing under GPL would fix the violation, but it wouldn't make it GPL.
  - regularfry 13y ago
    There's a 10-year-old post to LKML from Linus saying the GPL nature of kernel modules is a huge grey area. I don't think it's been resolved since then.
    - susi22 13y ago
      Correct. Link: http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0312.0/0670.html http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0312.0/0670.h...
- zokier 13y ago
  > If the answer is "yes", wouldn't that make it GPLd? No.
- belorn 13y ago
  As the others have said, no it would not make it GPL. However, the customers who bought such devices could try sue for feeling mislead as a customer. If Samsung ever used the word free, open, or even linux, they might be liable under false advertising consumer protection laws. Keyword here is might, and is likely to vary based on where you live. If enough people did this, samsung would likely feeling pressured to relicense the necessary (sold) kernel modules as GPL.
- bad_user 13y ago
  Licenses aren't applied automatically. What can happen is for Samsung to get sued for a violation of GPL and either be forced to license the code under GPL or pay damages.
nailer 13y ago
Is it possible that it was an accidental mistake, rather a deliberate attempt to spread 'Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt'? Be Civil. See http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- nullc 13y ago
  Part of the potency of FUD is that it's so easily believed and you'll seldom ever hear FUD from someone who doesn't personnel believe it. It shouldn't be a personal insult for someone to call out potential FUD when they see it.

synchronise 13y ago

I've updated the title to hopefully dispel any unintended interpretations.

gngeal 13y ago

Did Samsung, in fact, distribute the code in Android devices? If the answer is "yes", wouldn't that make it GPLd?

Nursie 13y ago
Not necessarily, no. There is a long history of people releasing closed source drivers, particularly on embedded platforms. So far as I can tell the kernel devs think it's harmful and A Bad Thing (TM), but not a violation. Also as has been pointed out below, it wouldn't automatically make it GPL. It would make it in violation of GPL and releasing under GPL would fix the violation, but it wouldn't make it GPL.
- regularfry 13y ago
  There's a 10-year-old post to LKML from Linus saying the GPL nature of kernel modules is a huge grey area. I don't think it's been resolved since then.
  - susi22 13y ago
    Correct. Link: http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0312.0/0670.html http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0312.0/0670.h...
zokier 13y ago
> If the answer is "yes", wouldn't that make it GPLd? No.
belorn 13y ago
As the others have said, no it would not make it GPL. However, the customers who bought such devices could try sue for feeling mislead as a customer. If Samsung ever used the word free, open, or even linux, they might be liable under false advertising consumer protection laws. Keyword here is might, and is likely to vary based on where you live. If enough people did this, samsung would likely feeling pressured to relicense the necessary (sold) kernel modules as GPL.
bad_user 13y ago
Licenses aren't applied automatically. What can happen is for Samsung to get sued for a violation of GPL and either be forced to license the code under GPL or pay damages.

nailer 13y ago

Is it possible that it was an accidental mistake, rather a deliberate attempt to spread 'Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt'? Be Civil. See http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

nullc 13y ago
Part of the potency of FUD is that it's so easily believed and you'll seldom ever hear FUD from someone who doesn't personnel believe it. It shouldn't be a personal insult for someone to call out potential FUD when they see it.