Asus has responded to the GPL violation allegations. "The source code found here is complete to the best of Asus's knowledge. If you believe any additional source code files should be provided under the applicable open source license, please contact Asus at support@asus.com and provide in detail the product or code module in question. Asus is committed to meeting the requirements of the open source licenses including the GNU General Public License." Additionally, ASUS announced the upcoming SDK for the eeePC. "Asus is also pleased to announce the upcoming release of the Eee PC SDK. This will allow for the development on the Eee PC by the OpenSource community making it easy to develop, easy to port and easy to release software for the Eee PC platform."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2005-11-12
Because the 2-clause BSD licence (also known as the modified BSD licence) is compatible with GPL?
That only means you can put BSD code in the kernel or in Linux drivers. But once the code is there only the GPL applies. You can't ship a binary driver and refuse to publish the source because it's dual GPL/BSD licensed.
The atheros sources they use are probably available in the zip-file on their site or from xandros though.
Edited 2007-11-28 08:55
Member since:2005-07-08
There are two links: the proprietary HAL to GPL/BSD driver and the resulting object to the kernel. How the licensing works depends on whether the distributor or the user performs each of these link steps. The only way the driver can be distributed under the GPL is if the user does both links. If the distributor does the first link, then the result may only be distributed under the BSD, and the user must perform the second link. The distributor cannot ship a completely linked kernel module as this is a violation of the GPL.
I'm not familiar with how Asus handles this situation. It could be as simple as automatically running a script on first boot. But they could be violating the GPL if they aren't doing something to cause the linking to become the action of the user rather than of the distributor.
Member since:
2006-01-01
if its under the bsd license... how are they able to link it with the kernel legally?