Re: non-free firmware in kernel modules, aggregation and unclear copyright notice.
Glenn Maynard <email@example.com> writes:
>> If you make a kernel module that only uses something
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL()'d from the kernel, you are NOT in principle
>> writing a derivative work. If you use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()'d
>> symbols, then you are incurring in (b) above and your kernel
>> module is most certainly a derivative work.
> The notion that what is a derivative work changes based on whether a symbol
> was declared with EXPORT_SYMBOL or EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL seems fundamentally
> absurd to me. (If somebody is reimplementing the Linux kernel API, he
> might just as easily reimplement the "EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL" symbols, for
> compatibility with drivers that need them, for example.)
Someone could even take the Linux kernel, and replace all
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL with EXPORT_SYMBOL. I see nothing in the GPL
prohibiting this. Sure, it wouldn't be nice, but it's legal not to be