On 10/7/20 7:53 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > 07.10.2020 16:36, Bob Ham пишет: >> Hi all, >> >> The Bluetooth controller driver sent to linux-input by Lukas Rusak >> (CC'd) is a bit of a concern. Here is the original driver: >> >> https://github.com/ouya/ouya_1_1-kernel/blob/master/drivers/hid/hid-ouya.c >> >> and you can see that there is no SPDX header, no license information and >> no MODULE_LICENSE declaration. I'd previously noticed this as a >> possible cause for concern in upstreaming the driver. >> >> Meanwhile, Lukas's driver is clearly derived from the Ouya Inc. driver >> and even retains the Ouya Inc. copyright notice line. However, Lukas's >> driver now has a MODULE_LICENSE("GPL") declaration added. >> >> Lukas, did you get clear permission to license the driver as GPL? >> >> Alternatively, kernel developers with greater legal or Ouya knowledge, >> is this actually a concern or is it nothing to worry about? > > Hello Bob, > > That can't be a problem because: > > 1. Ouya Inc. doesn't exists anymore. > > 2. If code was officially published, then this implies that it can be > derived. > > 3. Ouya's driver uses kernel symbols that are explicitly marked as > GPL-only, see hid_open_report for example. Hence Ouya's driver inherents > the GPL license. > > 4. Lukas's patch doesn't remind the original code at all. > > 5. In practice nobody cares about legal much if money aren't involved. > Even if it happened that driver was 100% violating some copyrights, then > it either won't be accepted to upstream or will be removed by request > from the copyrights holder. This definitely isn't the correct attitude to copyright. The facts[1] that Ouya published the code and that it used GPL-only symbols certainly does imply that they *should* have published under GPL or a compatible license, but doesn't mean that they definitely did. The only way to know that for sure is for there to be evidence in the file content or git history, such as license headers or Signed-off-by lines. When someone writes Signed-off-by in their code submission, which is required to contribute to upstream Linux, they are stating/warranting certain things about the code they're submitting. One aspect is that they definitely have the rights to submit the code under the given license. Without evidence to this effect, or having written the code themselves, nobody can state/warrant this. Take a look at the following link to see what you're stating/warranting when writing Signed-off-by in a code submission: https://developercertificate.org/ [1] I haven't checked the facts.
