Gentoo Archives: gentoo-amd64

From: "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss03@××××××××××.net>
To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL
Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 10:44:23
Message-Id: 200705280542.32246.bss03@volumehost.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL by Richard Freeman
1 On Monday 28 May 2007, Richard Freeman <rich@××××××××××××××.net> wrote
2 about 'Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL':
3 > Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
4 > > On Sunday 27 May 2007, Isidore Ducasse <ducasse.isidore@×××××.com>
5 > > wrote
6 > > about 'Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL':
7 > Note that while you can dual-license on ANY licenses you want (say the
8 > MS EULA and the GPLv3, for example), you can't just change licenses
9 > (even to add a new one) without the permission of the copyright holder.
10
11 Yes, I didn't mean to imply otherwise.
12
13 > So, Duncan's idea of dual-licensing the kernel under GPL v2/v3 until all
14 > bits of kernel code written by non-agreeing parties are removed would
15 > not work.
16
17 Right, but Linus could take the stance that all new submission have to be
18 licenced (to him) under GPLv2/GPLv3 and then one there's no GPLv2-only
19 code left, release a kernel under GPLv3. Until the point where there's no
20 GPLv2 only code, Linus could only release the whole work under GPLv2, but
21 everyone would know the transition was in the works.
22
23 > Things are much cleaner for the FSF - they hold the copyrights on all
24 > their code, so they can license things any way they want.
25
26 Things will also be nicer under the GPLv3, because they've extended
27 optional "or any greater version published by the FSF" to be an
28 optional "or any license approved by <foo>" where <foo> could be Linus
29 Torvalds, X.org, or the Gentoo Foundation.
30
31 > That requires
32 > a bit of trust to work, and I'm not sure it is the best model. Sure,
33 > with RS in charge I'm not worried, but nobody lives forever...
34
35 Worst case scenario you fork from the last acceptably licensed version, so
36 as long as the present license is perpetual and non-revocable then you are
37 fine. IIRC, the GPLv2 is perpetual but revocable, but only if you violate
38 it (for ANY content) in the first place.
39
40 --
41 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =.
42 bss03@××××××××××.net ((_/)o o(\_))
43 ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
44 http://iguanasuicide.org/ \_/

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL robert burrell donkin <robertburrelldonkin@×××××.com>
[gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>
Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL "Hemmann