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

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>]

On Jun 14, 2007, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> 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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/