Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 16:39:35 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
To: Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
Message-ID: <20070614153935.GO21478@ftp.linux.org.uk>
References: <466A3EC6.6030706@netone.net.tr> <200706131624.37211.bernd.paysan@gmx.de> <m3hcpb7gt2.fsf@maximus.localdomain> <200706141023.21624.bernd.paysan@gmx.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200706141023.21624.bernd.paysan@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 974
Lines: 17

On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:23:20AM +0200, Bernd Paysan wrote:
> A number of kernel hacker deliberately want their work under GPLv2 only 
> (like Al Viro), and they are fully entitled to do that - but they must 
> announce it in a propper place (not lkml or lwn.org)

A court deposition if somebody tries to do relicensing.  At that point
I believe that I made myself sufficiently clear, so I really doubt that
"all files without explicit license get the license defendant would like
and not the one located in the tree" would fly.  But you are welcome to
test that, of course - will make for nice punitive damages.  Just make
sure to test it yourself - giving somebody else an advice that will land
them in trouble is not nice...
-
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/