{"id":"GPL-2.0-only-with-Linux-syscall-note","title":"GNU General Public License, Version 2 with Linux Syscall Note","reviewed_on":"2026-09-22","reviewer":"Giray Havur","text_source":"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/spdx/license-list-data/main/text/GPL-2.0-only.txt","text_retrieved":true,"verdict":"created","summary":"The record models GNU General Public License, Version 2 with the exception the SPDX list calls Linux-syscall-note. It copies the model of GPL-2.0-only statement for statement and adds what the exception grants. The note keeps a user program that calls the kernel through normal system calls outside the covered work. The copyleft of the base licence still reaches the kernel, not a user program that uses kernel services by normal system calls, and the exception text is quoted in full in dalicc:additionalClauses.","findings":[{"rubric":1,"severity":"info","field":"spdx:licenseId","description":"The file name, the identifier and the local name of the odrl:Set IRI are all GPL-2.0-only-with-Linux-syscall-note. spdx:licenseId carries the SPDX expression \"GPL-2.0-only WITH Linux-syscall-note\", with one space, an upper-case WITH and one more space, which is how the SPDX list writes a licence combined with an exception.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":2,"severity":"info","field":"odrl:target","description":"One odrl:AssetCollection of dct:type dcmitype:Software, copied from GPL-2.0-only. The exception speaks of code, modules and executables throughout.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":3,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:permission","description":"Section 1 reads: \"You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program.\" Section 2 adds the right to modify and to distribute the modified work. The record therefore keeps every permission of GPL-2.0-only: reproduce, distribute, modify, derive, display, present, commercial use, derivative works, modified works and charging a distribution fee. The exception adds one more. It reads: \"NOTE! This copyright does *not* cover user programs that use kernel services by normal system calls - this is merely considered normal use of the kernel, and does *not* fall under the heading of \"derived work\".\" That is material the licence carves out of its own condition, so it is modelled as a permission dalicc:exceptedCombination.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":4,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:prohibition","description":"The prohibitions of GPL-2.0-only stay as they are. dalicc:ChangeLicense is still prohibited, because the exception narrows the reach of the reciprocity and does not let the covered work itself leave the licence. The note is about the boundary of the covered work rather than about linking. It says that a user program which calls the kernel through normal system calls is \"merely considered normal use of the kernel\" and is not a derived work.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":4,"severity":"minor","field":"odrl:prohibition","description":"dalicc:promote is prohibited because GPL-2.0-only prohibits it and an exception record keeps every statement of its base. Neither the base text nor the exception has a trademark or endorsement clause, so the prohibition is a library convention here and not text-supported. The review of GPL-2.0-only proposed removing it library-wide.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":5,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:duty","description":"The licence-wide cc:ShareAlike duty of GPL-2.0-only stays on the odrl:Set, because the reciprocity of the base licence still covers the whole work. cc:Attribution, cc:Notice and cc:SourceCode stay on distribute, modify and derive, and dalicc:modificationNotice on modify and derive. The note attaches no condition to the carve-out, so the dalicc:exceptedCombination permission carries no duty.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":5,"severity":"minor","field":"dalicc:reciprocityScope","description":"dalicc:reciprocityScope says in words how far the copyleft reaches after the exception: \"the kernel, not a user program that uses kernel services by normal system calls\". The base record carries no such annotation, because without the exception the reciprocity reaches the whole work.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":6,"severity":"major","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"The exception text is quoted verbatim as one literal of dalicc:additionalClauses, from https://spdx.org/licenses/Linux-syscall-note.html. Line breaks and runs of spaces were collapsed to single spaces, the way every other clause literal in the library is written; no word was changed, added or dropped. The warranty disclaimer and the limitation of liability are the ones of GPL-2.0-only, quoted verbatim from the base text, because the exception changes neither.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":7,"severity":"info","field":"cc:jurisdiction","description":"The base text and the exception name no legal system, so cc:jurisdiction stays dalicc:worldwide, dalicc:validityType stays dalicc:perpetual and no dalicc:governingLaw is stated. The termination and cure terms of the base licence are untouched by the exception.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":7,"severity":"info","field":"dalicc:orLaterVersionOption","description":"dalicc:orLaterVersionOption stays false, and the note itself says why: \"the only valid version of the GPL as far as the kernel is concerned is _this_ particular version of the license (ie v2, not v2.2 or v3.x or whatever), unless explicitly otherwise stated\". This is the one record of the set whose flag is supported by the exception text and not only by the base text.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":8,"severity":"gap","field":"dalicc:exceptedCombination","description":"The exception carves the combination out of the condition of the licence, not out of its grant. dalicc:exemptedMaterial says the opposite and is prohibited on OGL-UK-1.0, OGL-UK-2.0 and NLOD-2.0, where it means material the licence never granted. The vocabulary defines dalicc:exceptedCombination for this side of it since 2026-09-23, and the record carries it as a permission.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":8,"severity":"gap","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"The note states the boundary of the covered work rather than granting anything: a user program that uses kernel services by normal system calls \"does *not* fall under the heading of \"derived work\"\". The vocabulary has no term for a statement about what the copyright reaches, so the record carries it as an exempted permission and quotes it. Proposed term: dalicc:scopeClarification, an annotation naming material the licensor states is outside the work.","action":"none"},{"rubric":9,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"The consistency check against dg_default returned no conflicts. The exempted permission is a new action for the checker, it is not prohibited anywhere and the dependency graph holds no relation for it, so it neither triggers nor hides a conflict. The share-alike rule is not triggered, because dalicc:ChangeLicense stays prohibited.","action":"none"},{"rubric":10,"severity":"info","field":"dalicc:variantOf","description":"The record is the base licence plus the exception, so it repeats GPL-2.0-only statement for statement and adds four things: the dalicc:exceptedCombination permission, the dalicc:reciprocityScope annotation, the exception text in dalicc:additionalClauses and the pair dalicc:variantKind \"exception\" with dalicc:variantOf dalicclib:GPL-2.0-only. Nothing the base states was removed.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":4,"severity":"minor","field":"odrl:prohibition","description":"dalicc:promote was prohibited and no sentence of this text supports it. The statement was the library's reading of a legal default, that a copyright licence which says nothing about endorsement grants no right to it, and it sat in 519 of 581 records as a house convention. That reading is now an adopted dalicc:DefaultRule of the core dependency graph, which supplies it to every licence that is silent about the action, so a compatibility check reaches the same answer and the record states only what the text states. Removed on 2026-09-23; see section 13 of docs/LICENSE_REVIEW.md.","action":"applied","change":"# removed\nodrl:prohibition [ a odrl:Prohibition ;\n        odrl:action dalicc:promote ] ;\n"}],"family":"GNU copyleft family (GPL, LGPL, AGPL, FDL)","port_of":null,"variant_kind":"exception","variant_of":"GPL-2.0-only","notes":"The base licence text is the SPDX text of GPL-2.0-only, retrieved on 2026-09-22; the exception text is the SPDX text of Linux-syscall-note, from https://spdx.org/licenses/Linux-syscall-note.html. Nothing here is legal advice: the record says what the two texts say and quotes them. An exception record never removes a statement its base carries, so anything that looks wrong in this record and is also in GPL-2.0-only belongs to the base record and is written up as a proposal instead."}