On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:14 AM, John W. Linville <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 07:38:49PM +0200, RafaÅ MiÅecki wrote: >> 2010/10/14 Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxx>: > >> > I don't think that bitfields are copyrightable :) >> >> What about rest of the code? brcm80211 seems to support even newer >> devices we don't even try to support in b43 yet. >> >> Can I treat code as pure-GPL and do not care about that >> maybe-not-GPL-compatible statement in header? > > IANAL, but I think you should include the copyright statment with a > comment like "some portions covered by the following" at the top of > the files including such code. ÂBeyond that, I think you are fine > including it under GPL terms (which are merely more restrictive, > neither less restrictive nor incompatible). Agreed, for an example of where this was done check the ar9170 driver, Johannes took ISC licensed code from Otus and GPL'd it. You really can only GPL the code if you are making copyrightable changes to it though so best is if you leave the header as-is with the existing license unless you are making tons of changes. For further details you can refer to these guidelines: http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
