Return-path: Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.191]:44924 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754219AbXIBSXM (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 14:23:12 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k20so773827rvb for ; Sun, 02 Sep 2007 11:23:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <7579f7fb0709021123p7088ec41m5b688f527ba46d13@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 11:23:11 -0700 From: "Matthew Jacob" To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Fwd: That whole "Linux stealing our code" thing In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <200709010140.l811eq9H005896@cvs.openbsd.org> <20070902113638.78fbd202@the-village.bc.nu> <20070902115041.GM16016@stusta.de> <20070902134612.28a88761@the-village.bc.nu> <46DAC482.5090107@garzik.org> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: This has been pretty interesting for me to watch as I distribute my isp driver under a dual license (at least the portions of it which are common with the *BSD and Solaris ports) that is almost identical to Sam's verbiage. I'll admit that I hadn't thought about whether redistribution included the ability to modify the header (and thus the text of the licensing as I had written) or not. On balance I'd say I believe that the arguments for, on redistribution, picking one or the other license makes sense and honored my general intent. This allows people who modify the code (and presumably improve it) a "chef's choice" based on where they're serving the meal. IANAL, but I believe that none of this keeps me from continuing to put a dual license on stuff I leave up for distribution, or changing that to restricting the code to Martian Triathalon winners or what have you.