Native Linux Kernel Module Is Out For Microsoft exFAT

[PhilPotter]

It has to be GPLv2 for one simple reason

Samsung are distributing their devices (or specifically tablets) with kernel mode exFAT support - this driver calls into the VFS layer etc. and can be said to derive from the Linux kernel in a meaningful way. Therefore, in order for Samsung to legally ship this binary module pre-installed on their devices, it would have to be licensed as GPLv2.

It may be covered by patent law in certain countries, but purely from a copyright perspective, whether or not Samsung signed an NDA with Microsoft, they cannot legally distribute this driver on their devices unless they release the source for it under GPLv2 (which it appears they have). This is the reason so many Android closed source driver blobs are user space and use a transition layer - it can then be argued they do not derive from the kernel source and so don't have to be GPLv2.

The case is clear - copyright wise - this has to be GPLv2 or Samsung are distributing it illegally, regardless of any agreement with Microsoft.

[chithanh]

Therefore, this module needs to become available through Pirate Bay as a torrent, and/or mirrored in countries hostile to the US and to software patents.

Uh, dude. It is already mirrored several times on github. Whoever has rights to this code seems to have no interest to remove it from there. The Streisand effect needs only kick in when github takes down the repository.

The case is clear - copyright wise - this has to be GPLv2 or Samsung are distributing it illegally, regardless of any agreement with Microsoft.

Unfortunately this does not make the module license GPLv2 automatically. If Samsung distributes the module in violation of the license, the kernel copyright holders can demand that Samsung stops the distribution and pays damages. But nobody can demand that the license becomes GPL (as some other commenters in this thread seemed to suggest).

[PhilPotter]

Of course, you are correct regarding automatic status - I thought I implied this with my statement but obviously not. Apologies.

[blunden]

Some of you may already know this but the license specified in the source code this originally comes from clearly states "Samsung Proprietary". Assuming the code wasn't stolen by an employee, this is likely a case of Samsung mistakenly "open-sourcing" their proprietary code. It has happened at least once or twice before so it seems to be the most likely reason for this code being available.

[AndreiLux]

This code was leaked by somebody inside Samsung several months ago, the first instance I'm aware of is here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/show...6#post41330066

Considering rxzr's demeanor to my issue on Github, him deleting my reply to his absolutely misinformed and wrong response, and blocking me from the repository; I'll take the freedom to reply here:

I've posted this code under the "GPL tag" to let the techy websites spread the word about the driver, rather than treating it as a leak. I repeat: it was publicly available on github, and probably still is.

Just because there are a bunch of idiots who do not understand software licensing and still have had the leaked code on their repositories does not mean it is free, you can strip a license from it as you see fit, and throw a GPL tag on it and publish it as some kind of original work. It is nothing less than warez.

Because of the linux kernel being licensed under GPL, and Samsung using that kernel in their android devices along with this driver, I probably could've legally gotten this source code by the first request to them.

No, GPL applies to linker linked in code at compile time to the kernel. Samsung have distributed their exFat modules on the Galaxy line of phones for over a year and a half, this includes tens of millions of devices. Believe me that you cannot just request it because you have no right to it, the mobile device community has discussed this plenty over the last year.

You also could complete the driver written by Ogawa, using this source code, and then suggest including that driver into the kernel tree and get very famous.

The idea that this code would be somehow accepted into mainline is of pure na?vety and stupidity. This is not a free-for-all do-whatever-you-want ecosystem.

[blunden]

This code was leaked by somebody inside Samsung several months ago, the first instance I'm aware of is here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/show...6#post41330066

Here is an earlier reference. It's the earliest one I've found and likely where this code was forked from. It fits the description of a "Samsung tablet kernel".

https://github.com/kcrudup/gt-n8000-kernel/commit/cdaea0dcb6979d9a1a71f91fb5535b68ea8b77fe

[birdie]

This code was leaked by somebody inside Samsung several months ago, the first instance I'm aware of is here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/show...6#post41330066

Thank you.

This is exactly what I was talking about in this thread - yet Open Source fanatics laughed at me and said I was wrong - this driver is published legally. Fanaticism turns people into total imbeciles.

[AndreiLux]

Here is an earlier reference. It's the earliest one I've found and likely where this code was forked from. It fits the description of a "Samsung tablet kernel".

https://github.com/kcrudup/gt-n8000-...535b68ea8b77fe

I remember that repository. He seems to update official sources with mega-commits based on official source drops. If Samsung had mistakenly released it, it would be found in one of the source packages; http://opensource.samsung.com/recept...rchValue=n8000 , unless they pulled it. FYI: it's not to be found in any of these packages.

Doesn't really confirm the user as the source of the leak though.

[mrugiero]

Since Samsung seems to be relatively friendly to open source and this doesn't hurt them (and the code is already out there), they might as well GPL it because of all this. I hope they do, so it could be pulled into the official kernel.

[birdie]

Since Samsung seems to be relatively friendly to open source and this doesn't hurt them (and the code is already out there), they might as well GPL it because of all this. I hope they do, so it could be pulled into the official kernel.

There's no way this code can be incorporated - it's Microsoft's IP. Only clean room reverse engineering can land in mainline.