From alsa-devel-owner@alsa.jcu.cz  Sun Feb 28 11:03:49 1999
Received: from entry.jcu.cz (IDENT:perex@entry.jcu.cz [160.217.1.111])
	by marvin.jcu.cz (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA26234
	for <alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz>; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 11:02:29 +0100
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 11:02:29 +0100 (CET)
From: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@jcu.cz>
To: alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz
Subject: Re: (SB Live) Free drivers or not? (fwd)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.990228104206.11253B-100000@entry.jcu.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz
Sender: alsa-devel-owner@alsa.jcu.cz
Precedence: list

Hi,

	Here is the message from Richard Stallman. We discuss things about
GNU GPL and ALSA. If I understand correctly:

ALSA would have to accept non-free code (modules) or to accept only GPL
code (current status). The situation that Linus has given permission for
non-free modules is for me new (but this allows probably existence of OSS
commercial drivers). This also means that if we include ALSA driver to
the official kernel, we won't possible to restrict to add a non-GPL code.
I hate it.

If my assumptions are well, there is only one way for future - to accept
non-free kernel modules for ALSA code, too. I hope that I'm wrong with my
assumptions or I hope that there must be also another way.

							Jaroslav

-----
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@jcu.cz>
Academic Computer Centre, University of South Bohemia
Branisovska 31, C. Budejovice, CZ-370 05 Czech Republic

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 18:19:35 -0700 (MST)
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
To: perex@jcu.cz
Cc: Jacob Hawley <jhawley@creaf.com>, rms@santafe.edu
Subject: Re: (SB Live) Free drivers or not?

    I had some thought about mixing GPL and non-GPL code. It seems for me that
    non-GPL code mustn't call or to be dependend on the GPL code. Someone can
    make some "black box" which doesn't use any source from GPL code (including
    headers).

I don't think that this criterion is relevant to the issue.  When I
asked our lawyers about a similar situation, when NeXT had written a
front-end for GCC, I was told it would be copyright infringement if
they directed the users to link it with GCC.  (NeXT responded to this
by making that front end free software, and it is now part of the GCC
distribution.)

     Mr. Stallman, am I wrong here?

I think so.

But I am not sure this question is relevant to Linux drivers, because
Linus has given permission for non-free kernel modules.  So it is
legal to release non-free drivers as modules.

The point I would like to make is that the ALSA code cannot be used to
make such a non-free kernel module.  That would be illegal, not on
account of Linux, but on account of violating the distribution terms
of ALSA.


