GPL-only symbol Error

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 05:21:46PM -0800, Jeff Haran wrote:
> Perhaps, but that's not what I asked about. It seems to me the essence
> of GPL is that it grants people the right to modify GPL sources like
> the Linux kernel in any way they want so long as they make those
> changes available to whoever uses the code in the future. I don't see
> anything in it that prohibits specific changes. So if I take a symbol
> that in the sources from kernel.org is declared with
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(), make a 1 line change that declares it
> EXPORT_SYMBOL() and put that on a publically available web site, how
> have I violated GPL?

If you distribute that, nothing.  But if you somehow think that
"protects" your closed source kernel module to now use that symbol
exported by the condom module, you are mistaken.

Again, talk to a lawyer for the details, they are the best ones to
answer this for you, we aren't.

Would you ask a lawyer mailing list for medical questions?

greg k-h