Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750765AbWIWILG (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Sep 2006 04:11:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750825AbWIWILG (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Sep 2006 04:11:06 -0400 Received: from emailer.gwdg.de ([134.76.10.24]:6328 "EHLO emailer.gwdg.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750765AbWIWILD (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Sep 2006 04:11:03 -0400 Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 10:10:42 +0200 (MEST) From: Jan Engelhardt To: David Schwartz cc: linux-kernel Subject: RE: The GPL: No shelter for the Linux kernel? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Report: Content analysis: 0.0 points, 6.0 required _SUMMARY_ Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1158 Lines: 28 > >Second, I should point out again that it is unfortunate that Linus did not >retain for himself the exclusive right to modify the Linux kernel license. >If some real problem ever does emerge in the GPLv2 as applies to Linux, it >will be extremely difficult to resolve. > Easy to resolve, but difficult to implement: remove the offending code (and rewrite). >This is probably going to be controversial, but Linus should seriously >consider adding a clause that those who contribute to the kernel from >now on consent to allow him to modify the license on their current >contributions and all past contributions, amending the Linux kernel >license as appropriate. Now that you raise it: I think developers can already have done that if they wish - properly name author and conditions who may possibly change the license to what. Not that I have seen such code yet, but you never know. Jan Engelhardt -- - 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/