diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/LEGAL')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/LEGAL | 113 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 113 deletions
diff --git a/doc/LEGAL b/doc/LEGAL deleted file mode 100644 index 905141bca..000000000 --- a/doc/LEGAL +++ /dev/null @@ -1,113 +0,0 @@ -From: Chris Dunlap <[email protected]> -To: [email protected] (James Tak) -Cc: [email protected] (Leah Rogers), [email protected] (Jim Garlick), - [email protected] (Mark Gary), [email protected] (Kim Cupps) -Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 15:37:07 -0700 -Subject: CDDL/GPL licensing issues for ZFS Linux port - -James, - -We want to port Sun's Zettabyte File System (ZFS) to Linux and -ultimately redistribute the source code of our work. We've been -talking with Leah about this and have a meeting scheduled with you -for this coming Thursday at 2pm. I just wanted to give you a summary -before the meeting of what we're proposing. - -ZFS is part of OpenSolaris which is licensed under the Common -Development and Distribution License (CDDL): - - http://www.opensolaris.org/os/licensing/cddllicense.txt - -The Linux kernel is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL) -(specifically, under version 2 of the license only): - - http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html - -While these are both Open-Source licenses, the Free Software Foundation -(FSF) states they are incompatible with one another: - - http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html - - "[CDDL] is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; - it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the - GNU GPL. It requires that all attribution notices be maintained, - while the GPL only requires certain types of notices. Also, it - terminates in retaliation for certain aggressive uses of patents. - So, a module covered by the GPL and a module covered by the CDDL - cannot legally be linked together." - -As an aside, Sun is reportedly considering releasing OpenSolaris under -GPL3 (i.e., the upcoming version 3 of the GNU General Public License): - - http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/hp_and_sun_partnering_around - - http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060130-6074.html - - http://news.com.com/Sun+considers+GPL+3+license+for+Solaris/2100-1016_3-6032893.html - -Since the GPL3 has not been finalized, it is unclear whether -incompatibilities will exist between GPL2 and GPL3. - -Linus Torvalds (the original creator of Linux) describes his views -on the licensing of Linux kernel modules in the following email thread: - - http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Kernel/proprietary-kernel-modules.html - -Most of this thread is in regards to proprietary closed-source -binary-only modules for Linux. Linus generally considers modules -written for Linux using the kernel infrastructures to be derived -works of Linux, even if they don't copy any existing Linux code. -However, he specifically singles out drivers and filesystems ported -from other operating systems as not being derived works: - - "It would be rather preposterous to call the Andrew FileSystem a - 'derived work' of Linux, for example, so I think it's perfectly - OK to have a AFS module, for example." - - "The original binary-only modules were for things that were - pre-existing works of code, i.e., drivers and filesystems ported - from other operating systems, which thus could clearly be argued - to not be derived works..." - -Based on this, it seems our port of Sun's ZFS filesystem to Linux -would not be considered a derived work of Linux, and therefore not -covered by the GPL. The issue of the CDDL/GPL license incompatibility -becomes moot. As such, we should be able to redistribute our changes -to ZFS in source-code form licensed under the CDDL since this will -be a derived work of the original ZFS code. There seems to be some -dissent as to whether a binary module could be redistributed as well, -but that issue does not concern us. In this instance, we are only -interested in redistribution of our work in source-code form. - --Chris - -To: Chris Dunlap <[email protected]> -From: James Tak <[email protected]> -Subject: Re: CDDL/GPL licensing issues for ZFS Linux port -Cc: [email protected] (Leah Rogers), [email protected] (Jim Garlick), - [email protected] (Mark Gary), [email protected] (Kim Cupps) -Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 14:53:01 -0700 - -Hi Chris, -As per our discussion today, the ZFS port you are proposing releasing under -the CDDL license should be o.k. since it is a derivative work of the -original ZFS module (under CDDL) and is therefore also subject to CDDL -under the distribution terms of that license. While the issue of linking -has been greatly debated in the OS community, I think it is fair to say in -this instance the ZFS port is not a derivative work of Linux and thus not -subject to the GPL. Furthermore, it shouldn't be a problem especially -since even Linus Torvald has expressed that modules such as yours are not -derived works of Linux. - -Let me know if you have any further questions at x27274. Thanks. - -Regards, -James - -James S. Tak -Assistant Laboratory Counsel for Intellectual Property -Office of Laboratory Counsel -Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory -phone: (925) 422-7274 -fax: (925) 423-2231 |