Did Microsoft Violate the GPL? Free Software Lawyers Think So
- 0 Comments
After Microsoft announced they were releasing 20,000 lines of source code and device drivers for the Hyper-V for use with Linux, buzz surrounding their motives spread like wildfire. But certain sectors of the industry say that the move was a means for Microsoft to correct its violation of the General Public License V2 (GPLv2). The release, according to the Software Freedom Law Center, was a way for Microsoft to rectify their error. The addition of the codes to the Linux kernel is supposed to enhance the performance of Linux when it’s used with Hyper-V virtualization from Microsoft.
The oversight, as it was called, was supposedly discovered by Stephen Hemminger, an engineer working with Vyatta, a networking software company. Hemminger became aware that Microsoft had not released the source code for Hyper-V, although the software had incorporated the source code from the Linux kernel, which is GPL-licensed.
A user posted an inquiry on a forum regarding a possible network driver for Hyper-V to be used with Vyatta. Although the drivers were found, they carried both open and closed source components. The GPL does not allow the use of closed source and open source codes together. Hemminger decided to get in touch with Novell engineer Greg Kroah-Hartmann so Microsoft may be informed. Kroah-Hartmann is head of the Linux Kernel Driver Project and was collaborating with Microsoft to initiate the Linux IC codes into the Linux kernel. It was Kroah-Hartmann who also said that Hemminger’s posit that Microsoft was violating the GPL was ‘accurate’.
The ‘correction’ occurred about four months later, when Microsoft finally released the codes. Even then, talk regarding a violation had already ensued. Microsoft was supposed to have conformed with the licensing requirements imposed under GPLv2 but it took the company some time to comply.
Why the buzz?
The Linux community and its loyal users prefer the GPLv2 licensing type because of its coverage and wide range of acceptance. The license offered more in terms of support from the community. In the industry, when the distribution of the binaries meant for GPL work happens, the relevant source codes must also be released. The delay only put Microsoft’s move under suspicion.
Dave Roberts, vice president for strategy and marketing for Vyatta, maintains that no accusations happened and that Microsoft was only informed of the omission. According to Hemminger, Microsoft may have ‘possibly’ violated the GPL but the offense is not an outright defiance of set laws.