Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759781AbXFRGJz (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 02:09:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755000AbXFRGJq (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 02:09:46 -0400 Received: from srv1.netkinetics.net ([206.71.148.180]:51637 "EHLO srv1.netkinetics.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754974AbXFRGJp (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 02:09:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 From: Tim Post Reply-To: tim.post@netkinetics.net To: Gabor Czigola Cc: lkml In-Reply-To: <3a0f49600706171014m6bc9af34s9dda0ea282a4d63@mail.gmail.com> References: <3a0f49600706171014m6bc9af34s9dda0ea282a4d63@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Net Kinetics Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:08:03 +0800 Message-Id: <1182146883.21796.1480.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - srv1.netkinetics.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - netkinetics.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1544 Lines: 40 On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 19:14 +0200, Gabor Czigola wrote: > Hello! > > I didn't follow the whole thread from the beginning, but I see that > there are pros and cons for both versions of GPL. > > I wonder why the linux kernel development community couldn't propose > an own GPL draft (say v2.2) that is "as free as v2" and that includes > some ideas (from v3) that are considered as good (free, innovative, in > the spirit of whatever etc.) by the majority of the kernel developers. > > I guess to have an own version of the GPL license could also help to > resolve (future) dual-licensing problems. > > Gabor Czigola They very well could. There are provisions (I had to dig through gnu.org) to find them, but you are perfecly O.K. to take the legal terms of the GPL and make them your own in your own license. You can't copy their preamble without permission, and it can have no mention of GNU in the license once you finish. The issue would be compatibility. You can't have licenses fighting each other in your project, undesirable effects could include not being able to merge with code that remains under the original license. The popularity of GPL2 would make this rather impractical, but if this is no issue to you then there is no problem. In a kernel, its a big problem. Best, --Tim - 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/