Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750873AbWAYUoo (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2006 15:44:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750881AbWAYUoo (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2006 15:44:44 -0500 Received: from spirit.analogic.com ([204.178.40.4]:25617 "EHLO spirit.analogic.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750843AbWAYUon convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2006 15:44:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 In-Reply-To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Jan 2006 20:44:13.0394 (UTC) FILETIME=[19B72B20:01C621F0] Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: GPL V3 and Linux - Dead Copyright Holders Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 15:44:13 -0500 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: GPL V3 and Linux - Dead Copyright Holders Thread-Index: AcYh8BnAKXiv9UrlRTu2+JU/nEPp2Q== References: <43D114A8.4030900@wolfmountaingroup.com> <20060120111103.2ee5b531@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> <43D13B2A.6020504@cs.ubishops.ca> <43D7C780.6080000@perkel.com> <43D7B20D.7040203@wolfmountaingroup.com> <43D7B5C4.5040601@wolfmountaingroup.com> <43D7D05D.7030101@perkel.com> From: "linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" To: "Kyle Moffett" Cc: "Marc Perkel" , "Jeff V. Merkey" , "Patrick McLean" , "Stephen Hemminger" , Reply-To: "linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3339 Lines: 73 On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Kyle Moffett wrote: > On Jan 25, 2006, at 14:24:13, Marc Perkel wrote: >> Is it possible to have Linux be mostly GPL3 with parts of it GPL2? >> Or is that just too insane to deal with? > > Well given that parts of the kernel are GPLv2-only, other parts are > GPLv2+, other parts are GPL/BSD, etc, I can't see how somebody using > a GPLv3-only or GPLv3+ license for some other part would be > problematic. If anything, the multiple licensing provides additional > code protection; we get the advantages of all the licenses, but if > any one license is found to be invalid, it does not break the > protection of the body of code itself. > > Cheers, > Kyle Moffett > The original GPL said something about: "You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." (Section 6). Then, that __exact__ code was redistributed under Version 2 which further restricted rights, then additional versions which further restricted rights. Now you are planning to add additional restrictions? I don't think the present so-called license would pass muster in any sane court in the United States after the original licensed code was plagiarized into a new binding license. Simple test. Pretend the code was a music chart. Music charts have been copyrighted since the start of the copyright office. You write some music and, in its copyright notice, you license anybody to use it as long as they don't claim that they wrote it. Then some licensing agency comes along and writes a new license, effectively claiming ownership by claiming control (the legal word is conversion). Do you think for a moment that any court of law would uphold the new license? All of Linux has undergone such a conversion and it is effectively owned by the "Free Software Foundation, Inc." Of course RMS didn't tell you this when he appropriated it, but it's done. If code was written to be distributed under a certain set of rules, just like sheet-music, nobody but the writer or his assigns is allowed to change those distribution rules at a later date. If those rules are changed, they are invalid, i.e., unenforceable. You want new rules, you rewrite the kernel from scratch under the new rules and, you must not produce a derived work (which has many meanings) in the process or the new license is unenforceable as well. Cheers, Dick Johnson Penguin : Linux version 2.6.13.4 on an i686 machine (5589.66 BogoMips). Warning : 98.36% of all statistics are fiction. . **************************************************************** The information transmitted in this message is confidential and may be privileged. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify Analogic Corporation immediately - by replying to this message or by sending an email to DeliveryErrors@analogic.com - and destroy all copies of this information, including any attachments, without reading or disclosing them. Thank you. - 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/