Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 00:24:15 +0200 From: Marcin Dalecki <mdcki@gmx.net> To: David Leimbach <leimy2k@mac.com> Cc: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: policy on GPL'd drivers? Message-ID: <3ED3E58F.9030904@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <6855087.1054050580287.JavaMail.leimy2k@mac.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
David Leimbach wrote: > > On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 10:40AM, Alexander Kabaev <ak03@gte.com> wrote: > > >>On Tue, 27 May 2003 10:32:42 -0500 >>David Leimbach <leimy2k@mac.com> wrote: >> >> >>> Ugh... the network driver portion of the nforce drivers is *not* >>> GPL'd but it >>>has a linux only and anti-reverse engineeing clause. >>> >>>Dave >> >>Then using the diver on FreeBSD will be a NVidia's license violation, >>wouldn't it? One more reason to keep it out of the tree. > > > Just the network driver... the audio driver in the tarball is still GPL'd. > > Either which way I doubt either driver will go into the tree. I don't see > any good reason to stick any of it in the kernel unless its absolutely > necessary. > > I am not a religious person when it comes to licensing. I just don't like > GPL style restrictions. Did you ever ask NVidia about they position on this? Perhaps they are more flexible then you may think and this whole discussion is simply pointless.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3ED3E58F.9030904>