Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756064AbXFONTs (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:19:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753838AbXFONTk (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:19:40 -0400 Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.228]:6556 "EHLO nz-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753781AbXFONTj (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:19:39 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=UowxVFGZhoDQ7IbvdvEgTLMpMllMGO0RrmIOgKDgJaYYUeVe7hSd80lz1wowaqMwyzeTDZtJSgY+ZTVaRHRn6Tcbrh6V0F8BNkdMxA3NOOikKmcKCUUQ++Oy4/cHjuGE/Plv00iymUMT00zJj/14X6GEx10Fgs2/CPJfPMhKbmY= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:19:38 -0400 From: "Dmitry Torokhov" To: "Alan Cox" Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Cc: "Bernd Paysan" , "Alexandre Oliva" , "Paulo Marques" , "Al Viro" , "Krzysztof Halasa" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20070615141923.63fd5cdd@the-village.bc.nu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <466A3EC6.6030706@netone.net.tr> <200706151048.57762.bernd.paysan@gmx.de> <20070615135739.14862d6d@the-village.bc.nu> <20070615141923.63fd5cdd@the-village.bc.nu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1317 Lines: 29 On 6/15/07, Alan Cox wrote: > O> GPL itself does not. But the author(s) may when they specify "any > > later version", "dual GPL/BSD", etc. In this case (IMHO) distributor > > in fact relicenses the code and may reduce license to sipmply BSD or > > simply GPL, or "GPL v3 from now on". To "restore" license you would > > need to go upstream and get the code from there. > > I don't see anything in the GPL that permits a redistributor to change > the licence a piece of code is distributed under. If my code is GPL v2 or > later you cannot take away the "or later" unless explicitly granted > powers by the author to vary the licence. > > What you most certainly can do is modify it and decide your modifications > are GPLv3 only thus creating a derived work which is GPLv3 only. However > anyone receiving your modified version and reverting the modifications is > back at v2 or later. > Yes, I agree. When I am saying "distributor" it is someone like RedHat or TiVO who do modify the code, not merely use it in ints original form. -- Dmitry - 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/