On Mon, 2 Oct 2006, Marc Perkel wrote:
> Just a thought. Suppose we forked the GPL2 license and created the Linux
> license? (Or some better name) It's kind of clear the Stallman has his own
> ajenda and that it's not compatible with the Linux model. So - lets fork it an
> start a new one.
The GPLv2 isn't open source, so it can't (legally) be forked:
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
(The "mere aggregation" clause is, in fact, very important, since
otherwise it would be impossible to distribute GPLed code along with the
license for it.)
Now, it would be plausible to get Creative Commons to do a "provide
source" clause, such that there would be an alternative text with the same
effect as the GPLv2, if there was enough negative opinion about the FSF to
justify having an alternative text to use for this effect.
-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
-
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]
