Re: GPL V3 and Linux - Dead Copyright Holders

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Marc Perkel wrote:
If I write some code and that code becomes a critical part of the linux kernel and my code is GPLv3 then no one could use Linux unless they removed my code. (And all GPLv3 code) - Thus the inclusion of GPLv3 code would force the whole kernel to be effectively GPLv3. Unless Linus says nothing gets included unless it's GPLv2. 

[more to this effect]
I assume that Linus's dissatisfaction with the GPLv3 means that this licensing characteristic is implied. I suppose it might be valuable to have an explicit declaration on this issue.
As for the rest of my message, my remarks and assumptions about how Linux is governed by the most restrictive clause apply to today's kernel (ie, no GPLv3 code at all).
I was honestly hoping that this debate wouldn't ignite until when we were much closer to having the real, final license. Or perhaps that it would ignite with the purpose of participating in the development of GPLv3. Neither seems to be the case, and so notwithstanding your concers about people merging in GPLv3 code, if the issue's not dead already, it's probably frozen until the real, live GPLv3 gets released. 

Cheers,
Chase
-
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]
  Powered by Linux