video cards

[Leo Mauler]

--- Jeffrey Watts <jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com> wrote:

> nVidia's driver uses kernel headers, which is
> technically a violation of the GPL.  However, 
> this is not an issue of abuse, but more of a
> unique situation, since the kernel is a unique 
> item on a system.  It's not an application and 
> it's not a library, but has features of both.

And as I pointed out, if a "non-free" application's
use of kernel headers is considered an enforceable
violation of the GPL, then nothing non-native can
legally be run in Linux, including anything run
through Wine or Transgaming's Cedega.

> The LPGL is not an appropriate copyright for 
> the kernel - the GPL is more appropriate. 
> However the GPL isn't perfect either.
> 
> Stallman and Torvalds have both stated that 
> while there is certainly an issue, it is not 
> violating the spirit of the Free Software 
> movement.  I also believe Torvalds has blessed 
> this particular kind of thing and said that he 
> does not see it to be a problem.

As I mentioned towards the end of the really long
email message, kernel developers have put
documentation into the modules.h header file
indicating that they are expecting proprietary modules
and as such have created a "proprietary" type.  Anyone
with Linux installed on a machine can see this
documentation in
/usr/src/linux/include/linux/module.h, showing that
the kernel developers planned on having end users with
proprietary drivers.

> So I put it to Luke thus (and I'm echoing Leo):  
> If Stallman (the most hardheaded and fervent 
> Free Software advocate on the planet) and 
> Torvalds (the reason you're here) both say it's
> cool, how is it that you feel that your viewpoint 
> is superior?


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.  
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com