From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2007 00:04:17 -0700
Message-ID: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKAEFCEHAC.davids@webmaster.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-9"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <466A3EC6.6030706@netone.net.tr>
Importance: Normal
Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1238
Lines: 30


> 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 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/