diff is a little diff -- erent

Mehmet Erol Sanliturk m.e.sanliturk at gmail.com
Sun Aug 30 08:05:32 UTC 2020

On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 10:26 AM Steve O'Hara-Smith <steve at sohara.org>

> On Sun, 30 Aug 2020 09:57:48 +0300
> Mehmet Erol Sanliturk <m.e.sanliturk at gmail.com> wrote:
> > There is NOT a rule in the GPL that  a GPL based operating system is not
> > allowed to run a
> > closed source software  as long as the closed source software does NOT
> use
> > a GPL licensed part .
> >
> > The main point is that requirement .
>         Indeed the crux is modifying code released under GPL, if you do
> that then the modifications must be released under GPL even if the
> modifications are much larger than the original code. At least that's my
> understanding but when it matters always consult a specialist lawyer.
> --
> Steve O'Hara-Smith <steve at sohara.org>
> _______________________________________________

You are right .

Please see

Linux kernel licensing rules

The Linux Kernel is provided under the terms of the GNU General Public
License version 2 only (GPL-2.0), as provided in
LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0, with an explicit syscall exception described in
LICENSES/exceptions/Linux-syscall-note, as described in the COPYING file.

This documentation file provides a description of how each source file
should be annotated to make its license clear and unambiguous. It doesn’t
replace the Kernel’s license.


and please notice

with an explicit syscall exception described in

The above exception is allowing to run closed source software in the Linux
operating system .

The routines are used ( when a syscall is issued ) by the operating system
, not the issue generated program , even in that case closed source program
is depending on a GPL licensed part . If there is not any exception to the
GPL license usage like the above mentioned , the closed source program
should be open sourced .

For the FreeBSD case :

If there are GPL parts in the base system , no one can use ( FreeBSD
operating system base ) as a part of
any proprietary ( closed source ) system which is not an acceptable
situation for companies attempting to produce a commercial product
depending on FreeBSD base system .

This means it is likely that they will not need to support the FreeBSD
project .
Money is not raining on to commercial companies like water rains .

( I am NOT affiliated into  ANY commercial company or activity . Only it is
necessary to think how they are operating in their environment . )

Mehmet Erol Sanliturk

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list