Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758832AbXFQImw (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 04:42:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756328AbXFQImo (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 04:42:44 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:48231 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754055AbXFQImn (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 04:42:43 -0400 To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Daniel Hazelton , Jesper Juhl , Alan Cox , Chris Friesen , Linus Torvalds , Greg KH , debian developer , david@lang.hm, Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 References: <466A3EC6.6030706@netone.net.tr> <200706150308.20148.dhazelton@enter.net> <200706151715.55218.dhazelton@enter.net> <20070615215734.GB16371@elte.hu> <20070617081521.GC6267@elte.hu> From: Alexandre Oliva Organization: Red Hat OS Tools Group Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 05:42:03 -0300 In-Reply-To: <20070617081521.GC6267@elte.hu> (Ingo Molnar's message of "Sun\, 17 Jun 2007 10\:15\:21 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.990 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3372 Lines: 73 On Jun 17, 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote: > Again, as a reminder, this point was presented to you (see the > quotes above), in the discussion about whether the Tivo is fine by > the GPLv2 or not: That's false. I've explicitly avoided discussions on whether the legal terms of GPLv2 permit tivoization. What I've done was to discuss whether the tivoization was in line with mission (since you seem to have a problem grasping the notion of spirit of a license) of the license, because some people (yourself included) claimed GPLv3 changed the spirit. That others tried to steer the discussion away from this apparently incomprehensible concept of spirit of the license, to the point of their and your getting utterly confused and making nonsensical claims about inconsistencies in my reasoning, moving it into the legal terms that I was not willing to discuss, is not my fault. My participation here was about intent, about spirit, about mission of the GPL. As I've already made it clear, this doesn't necessarily match intent of people who chose GPLv2 as the license, and that's fine. Copyright holders know the spirit as they understood it, and that's how they meant to license their work. But the spirit (mission) of the GPL is the one the FSF wrote about in the preamble. No amount of "but the legal terms say such and such" or "but I'm the licensor" distractions can change that. > ' You're again confusing legal terms with the intent. The legal > terms provide an indication of the intent, but the preamble, > along with the free software definition it alludes to, do an even > better job at that. ' > and you have simply been pointed out that what you say is trivially > false - the simple legal fact is that the GPLv2 does not "embedd" more > than what is its letter and, to the lesser extent that letter may be > ambigious, what Linus' (and other copyright holders') intent is and was. > Not RMS's external intentions or the "free software definition" you > mention. Which shows you don't understand the notion of "spirit of license" (as opposed to intent of licensing, which I AFAIK invented today to try to dispell this confusion), and that the fact that the letter of the license doesn't have bearing about the intent of the author of the license, which is what the spirit of the license is about. > how about just simply admitting that you were wrong about this, I'm not. You are. Really. Until you understand the difference between "letter of license", "intent of licensor" and "spirit of license", you won't be able to understand this. > I've yet to see a _single_ instance of you admitting in this thread > that "oops, it seems i was really wrong about this point. Sorry.". I've done that, IIRC more than once. Sorry to disappoint you. > Or are you one of those perfect humans who are never wrong? ;-) :-) I wish :-) -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} - 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/