RE: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

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

 



> But; if the Linux kernel should Dual-Licensed (GPL V2 and GPL V3), it
> will allow us the both worlds' fruits like code exchanging from other
> Open Source Projects (OpenSolaris etc.) that is compatible with GPL V3
> and not with GPL V2 and of course the opposite is applicable,too.

That is a misleading claim. While being dual-licensed would make it either
for other projects to adopt Linux code, it would have three downsides:

1) If Linux code were adopted into other projects that were not
dual-licensed, changes could not be imported back into Linux unless the
changes were dual-licensed which is not likely when the contributions are
made to a project that's not dual-licensed.

2) Linux could no longer take code from other projects that are GPL v2
licensed unless it could obtain them under a dual license.

And, last and probably most serious:

3) Linux derivatives could be available with just a GPL v3 license and no
GPL v2. license if the derivers wanted things that way.

DS


-
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