Re: Possibly offtopic : Binary only driver

[Alan Cox <alan redhat com>]

On Sun, Nov 21, 2004 at 03:09:08PM +0000, Mike Hearn wrote:
> > rest is required to be GPL anyway in principle so can be adjusted.
> 
> I thought binary modules were OK, hence the whole GPL vs non-GPL symbol
> versioning system?

The GPL v non-GPL is intended to help identify stuff that is clearly GPL
only use from stuff that is "maybe". You get into an area of law called
"derived works" which is to say the least full of grey areas in this zone.
Essentially there isn't any caselaw to guide people _yet_.

For the USB driver case there is libusb anyway