On Jun 14, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote:
> .. but I think that the software license I choose should be about the
> software, and about giving back in kind.
> And the GPLv2 is _perfect_ for that.
> And the GPLv3 is horrible.
Is there anything other than TiVOization to justify these statements?
Also, can you elaborate on what you mean about 'giving back in kind'?
(I suspect this is related with the tit-for-tat reasoning, that you've
failed to elaborate on before)
The only thing the GPL demands is respect for others' freedoms, as in,
"I, the author, respect your freedoms, so you, the licensee, must
respect others' freedoms as well". Is this the "in kind" you're
talking about? Or are you mistaken about the actual meaning of even
GPLv2?
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
