['< sod > another debated case of gpl compatibility is the [ [ cddl ] ] licensed [ [ zfs ] ] file system with the gplv2 licensed [ [ linux kernel ] ]. < ref > { { cite web | url = http : / / zfsonlinux. org / faq. html # whataboutthelicensingissue | title = 2. 2 what is the licensing concern? | website = zfsonlinux. com } } { { dead link | date = july 2016 } } < / ref > despite that both are free software under a copyleft license, zfs is not distributed with most [ [ linux distro ] ] s like [ [ debian ] ] < ref > { { cite web | format = email message | url = http : / / list. zfsonlinux. org / pipermail / zfs - discuss / 2014 - august / 018505. html | quote = upstream zol project [ 3 ] holds the view that in this case the combination of the two in the same binary would create a derived work, so this is not acceptable for redistribution. we accept the interpretation that this last case is not acceptable for redistribution. therefore our package does not ( and never will ) ship or facilitate building a custom kernel where the zol zfs driver is built - in in a monolithic binary, instead of built as an independent dynamic lkm. | title = [ zfs - discuss ] summary of zfs on linux for debian ( was : zfs - linux _ 0. 6. 2 - 1 _ amd64. changes rejected ) | first = aron | last = xu | website = zfs on linux | date = 2014 - 08 - 28 | accessdate = 2016 - 01 - 14 } } < / ref > < ref > { { cite web | url = http : / / comments. gmane. org / gmane. linux. info file - systems. zfs. user / 18380 | title = pkg - zfsonlinux - devel - zfs - linux _ 0. 6. 2 - 1 _ amd64. changes rejected | first = paul richards | last = tagliamonte | quote = our consensus was that this package appears to violate the spirit of the gpl at minimum, and may cause legal problems. judges often interpret documents as they\'re intended to read, hacks to comply with the letter but not the intent are not looked upon fondly. this may be a hard thing for technical folks to accept, but in legal cases one usually isn\'t dealing with technical people. as such, this package has been rejected. | date = 2014 - 08 - 26 | accessdate = } } { { dead link | date = july 2016 } } < / ref > ( but with [ [ freebsd ] ] and even [ [ mac os ] ] ) as the cddl is considered incompatible to the gpl\'ed linux kernel by the fsf and most other foss parties. < ref name = " gpl - incompat " / > < ref name = " zfs " > { { cite web | url = https : / / lwn. net / articles / 611657 / | title = yao : the state of zfs on linux | date = 2014 - 09 - 11 | accessdate = | author = jake | website = lwn. net | publisher = eklektix } } < / ref > there are alternative positions ; the legal interpretation, if and when this combination constitutes a combined work or derivative work of the gpled kernel, is [ [ ambiguous ] ] and controversial. < ref > { { cite book | url = http : / / www. oreilly. de / german / freebooks / gplger / pdf / 025 - 168. pdf | format = pdf | quote = in der praxis ist stark umstritten, ob ein kernelmodul als\'derivative work\'betrachtet werden muss. die auseinandersetzungen um binar - treiber fur linux werden mit heftigkeit gefuhrt. man wird wohl nicht fur samtliche kernelmodule eine einheitliche antwort finden konnen : wann ein kernelmodul von linux » abgeleitet « ist, hangt stark von der technischen umsetzung ab und richtet sich nach den oben dargelegten kriterien. [ … ] es existieren allerdings auch kernelmodule, die alter sind als linux, etwa das dateisystem afs. dort liegt es auf der hand, dass sie als funktional eigenstandig anzusehen sind, da sie gar nicht » fur linux « geschrieben sein konnen. | pages = 70 | work = ziffer 2 gpl | first = till | last = jaeger | title = die gpl kommentiert und erklart | publisher = institut fur rechtsfragen der freien und open source software | date = 2005 - 03 - 01 | accessdate = 2016 - 01 - 12 | isbn = 3 - 89721 - 389 - 3 | language = german } } < / ref > in 2015 the cddl to gpl compatibility question reemerged when the [ [ linux distribution ] ] [ [ ubuntu ( operating system ) | ubuntu ] ] announced to include [ [ openzfs ] ] by default. < ref > { { cite web | url = https : / / www. phoronix. com / scan. php? page = news _ item & px = ubuntu - zfs - standard - plans | title = ubuntu is planning to make the zfs file - system a\'standard\'offering | website = [ [ phoronix ] ] | authorlink = michael larabel | first = michael | last = larabel | date = 2015 - 08 - 06 | accessdate = } } < / ref > in 2016 ubuntu announced that a legal review resulted in the conclusion that it is legally safe to use zfs as binary [ [ kernel module ] ] in linux. < ref > { { cite web | url = https : / / insights. ubuntu. com / 2016 / 02 / 18 / zfs - licensing - and - linux / | title = zfs licensing and linux | website = ubuntu insights | publisher = canonical | first = dustin | last = kirkland | date = 2016 - 02 - 10 | accessdate = } } < / ref > others followed ubuntu\'s conclusion, for instance lawyer james e. j. bottomley argued there can\'t be " a convincing theory of harm " developed making it impossible to bring the case to court. < ref > { { cite web | url = http : / / blog. hansenpartnership. com / are - gplv2 - and - cddl - incompatible / | title = are gplv2 and cddl incompatible? | website = james bottomley\'s random pages | first = james e. j. | last = bottomley | quote = what the above analysis shows is that even though we presumed combination of gplv2 and cddl works to be a technical violation, there ’ s no way actually to prosecute such a violation because we can ’ t develop a convincing theory of harm resulting. because this makes it impossible to take the case to court, effectively it must be concluded that the combination of gplv2 and cddl, provided you ’ re following a gplv2 compliance regime for all the code, is allowable. | date = 2016 - 02 - 23 } } < / ref > { { sps | certain = y | date = july 2016 } } [ [ eben moglen ] ], co - author of the [ [ gplv3 ] ] and founder of the [ [ software freedom law center | sflc ] ], argues that while the letters of the gpl might be violated the spirit of both licenses is unharmed, which would be the relevant aspect in court. < ref > { { cite web | url = https : / / softwarefreedom. org / resources / 2016 / linux - kernel - cddl. html | title = the linux kernel, cddl and related issues | website = software freedom law center | first = eben | last = moglen | first2 = mishi | last2 = choudhary | date = 2016 - 02 - 26 | accessdate = } } < / ref > on the other hand, [ [ bradley m. kuhn ] ] and [ [ karen m. sandler ] ] from the [ [ software freedom conservancy ] ] argued that ubuntu would violate both licenses as a binary zfs module would be a derivative work of the linux kernel and announced their will to achieve clarity in this question, even by court. < ref > { { cite web | url = https : / / sfconservancy. org / blog / 2016 / feb / 25 / zfs - and - linux / | title = gpl violations related to combining zfs and linux | website = software freedom conservancy | first = bradley m. | last = kuhn | first2 = karen m. | last2 = sandler | quote = ultimately, various courts in the world will have to rule on the more general question of linux combinations. conservancy is committed to working towards achieving clarity on these questions in the long term. that work began in earnest last year with the vmware lawsuit, and our work in this area will continue indefinitely, as resources permit. we must do so, because, too often, companies are complacent about compliance. while we and other community - driven organizations have historically avoided lawsuits at any cost in the past, the absence of litigation on these questions caused many companies to treat the gpl as a weaker copyleft than it actually is. [ … ] conservancy ( as a linux copyright holder ourselves ), { { citation needed | date = march 2016 } } along with the members of our coalition in the gpl compliance project for linux developers, all agree that canonical and others infringe linux copyrights when they distribute zfs. ko. | date = 2016 - 02 - 25 | accessdate = } } < / ref > < eod > < sod > another debated case of gpl compatibility is the [ [ cddl ] ] licensed [ [ zfs ] ] file system with the gplv2 licensed [ [ linux kernel ] ]. < ref > { { cite web | url = http : / / zfsonlinux. org / faq. html # whataboutthelicensingissue | title = 2. 2 what is the licensing concern? | website = zfsonlinux. com } } { { dead link | date = july 2016 } } < / ref > despite that both are free software under a copyleft license, zfs is not distributed with most [ [ linux distro ] ] s like [ [ debian ] ] < ref > { { cite web | format = email message | url = http : / / list. zfsonlinux. org / pipermail / zfs - discuss / 2014 - august / 018505. html | quote = upstream zol project [ 3 ] holds the view that in this case the combination of the two in the same binary would create a derived work, so this is not acceptable for redistribution. we accept the interpretation that this last case is not acceptable for redistribution. therefore our package does not ( and never will ) ship or facilitate building a custom kernel where the zol zfs driver is built - in in a monolithic binary, instead of built as an independent dynamic lkm. | title = [ zfs - discuss ] summary of zfs on linux for debian ( was : zfs - linux _ 0. 6. 2 - 1 _ amd64. changes rejected ) | first = aron | last = xu | website = zfs on linux | date = 2014 - 08 - 28 | accessdate = 2016 - 01 - 14 } } < / ref > < ref > { { cite web | url = http : / / comments. gmane. org / gmane. linux. file - systems. zfs. user / 18380 | title = pkg - zfsonlinux - devel - zfs - linux _ 0. 6. 2 - 1 _ amd64. changes rejected | first = paul richards | last = tagliamonte | quote = our consensus was that this package appears to violate the spirit of the gpl at minimum, and may cause legal problems. judges often interpret documents as they\'re intended to read, hacks to comply with the letter but not the intent are not looked upon fondly. this may be a hard thing for technical folks to accept, but in legal cases one usually isn\'t dealing with technical people. as such, this package has been rejected. | date = 2014 - 08 - 26 | accessdate = } } { { dead link | date = july 2016 } } < / ref > ( but with [ [ freebsd ] ] and even [ [ mac os ] ] ) as the cddl is considered incompatible to the gpl\'ed linux kernel by the fsf and some parties with relations to the fsf. < ref name = " gpl - incompat " / > < ref name = " zfs " > { { cite web | url = https : / / lwn. net / articles / 611657 / | title = yao : the state of zfs on linux | date = 2014 - 09 - 11 | accessdate = | author = jake | website = lwn. net | publisher = eklektix } } < / ref > there are alternative positions ; the legal interpretation, if and when this combination constitutes a combined work or derivative work of the gpled kernel, is [ [ ambiguous ] ] and controversial. < ref > { { cite book | url = http : / / www. oreilly. de / german / freebooks / gplger / pdf / 025 - 168. pdf | format = pdf | quote = in der praxis ist stark umstritten, ob ein kernelmodul als\'derivative work\'betrachtet werden muss. die auseinandersetzungen um binar - treiber fur linux werden mit heftigkeit gefuhrt. man wird wohl nicht fur samtliche kernelmodule eine einheitliche antwort finden konnen : wann ein kernelmodul von linux » abgeleitet « ist, hangt stark von der technischen umsetzung ab und richtet sich nach den oben dargelegten kriterien. [ … ] es existieren allerdings auch kernelmodule, die alter sind als linux, etwa das dateisystem afs. dort liegt es auf der hand, dass sie als funktional eigenstandig anzusehen sind, da sie gar nicht » fur linux « geschrieben sein konnen. | pages = 70 | work = ziffer 2 gpl | first = till | last = jaeger | title = die gpl kommentiert und erklart | publisher = institut fur rechtsfragen der freien und open source software | date = 2005 - 03 - 01 | accessdate = 2016 - 01 - 12 | isbn = 3 - 89721 - 389 - 3 | language = german } } < / ref > in 2015 the cddl to gpl compatibility question reemerged when the [ [ linux distribution ] ] [ [ ubuntu ( operating system ) | ubuntu ] ] announced to include [ [ openzfs ] ] by default. < ref > { { cite web | url = https : / / www. phoronix. com / scan. php? page = news _ item & px = ubuntu - zfs - standard - plans | title = ubuntu is planning to make the zfs file - system a\'standard\'offering | website = [ [ phoronix ] ] | authorlink = michael larabel | first = michael | last = larabel | date = 2015 - 08 - 06 | accessdate = } } < / ref > in 2016 ubuntu announced that a legal review resulted in the conclusion that it is legally safe to use zfs as binary [ [ kernel module ] ] in linux. < ref > { { cite web | url = https : / / insights. ubuntu. com / 2016 / 02 / 18 / zfs - licensing - and - linux / | title = zfs licensing and linux | website = ubuntu insights | publisher = canonical | first = dustin | last = kirkland | date = 2016 - 02 - 10 | accessdate = } } < / ref > others followed ubuntu\'s conclusion, for instance lawyer james e. j. bottomley argued there can\'t be " a convincing theory of harm " developed making it impossible to bring the case to court. < ref > { { cite web | url = http : / / blog. hansenpartnership. com / are - gplv2 - and - cddl - incompatible / | title = are gplv2 and cddl incompatible? | website = james bottomley\'s random pages | first = james e. j. | last = bottomley | quote = what the above analysis shows is that even though we presumed combination of gplv2 and cddl works to be a technical violation, there ’ s no way actually to prosecute such a violation because we can ’ t develop a convincing theory of harm resulting. because this makes it impossible to take the case to court, effectively it must be concluded that the combination of gplv2 and cddl, provided you ’ re following a gplv2 compliance regime for all the code, is allowable. | date = 2016 - 02 - 23 } } < / ref > { { sps | certain = y | date = july 2016 } } [ [ eben moglen ] ], co - author of the [ [ gplv3 ] ] and founder of the [ [ software freedom law center | sflc ] ], argues that while the letters of the gpl might be violated the spirit of both licenses is unharmed, which would be the relevant aspect in court. < ref > { { cite web | url = https : / / softwarefreedom. org / resources / 2016 / linux - kernel - cddl. html | title = the linux kernel, cddl and related issues | website = software freedom law center | first = eben | last = moglen | first2 = mishi | last2 = choudhary | date = 2016 - 02 - 26 | accessdate = } } < / ref > on the other hand, [ [ bradley m. kuhn ] ] and [ [ karen m. sandler ] ] from the [ [ software freedom conservancy ] ] argued that ubuntu would violate both licenses as a binary zfs module would be a derivative work of the linux kernel and announced their will to achieve clarity in this question, even by court. < ref > { { cite web | url = https : / / sfconservancy. org / blog / 2016 / feb / 25 / zfs - and - linux / | title = gpl violations related to combining zfs and linux | website = software freedom conservancy | first = bradley m. | last = kuhn | first2 = karen m. | last2 = sandler | quote = ultimately, various courts in the world will have to rule on the more general question of linux combinations. conservancy is committed to working towards achieving clarity on these questions in the long term. that work began in earnest last year with the vmware lawsuit, and our work in this area will continue indefinitely, as resources permit. we must do so, because, too often, companies are complacent about compliance. while we and other community - driven organizations have historically avoided lawsuits at any cost in the past, the absence of litigation on these questions caused many companies to treat the gpl as a weaker copyleft than it actually is. [ … ] conservancy ( as a linux copyright holder ourselves ), { { citation needed | date = march 2016 } } along with the members of our coalition in the gpl compliance project for linux developers, all agree that canonical and others infringe linux copyrights when they distribute zfs. ko. | date = 2016 - 02 - 25 | accessdate = } } < / ref > < eod >']