linux-kernel - Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 19 Jun 2007 15:10:53 +0200
From:	Johannes Stezenbach <js@...uxtv.org>
To:	Manu Abraham <abraham.manu@...il.com>
Cc:	Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
	Bernd Schmidt <bernds_cb1@...nline.de>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	debian developer <debiandev@...il.com>, david@...g.hm,
	Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@...one.net.tr>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

On Tue, Jun 19, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
> Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> 
> > I argue that if you keep the free loaders out, you miss
> > the chance to communicate with and educate them.
> > Communication across borders doesn't work well, and you create
> > a border between the morally "good" and the "bad".
> > 
> > Of course you can't expect that every free loader will
> > learn and accept the free software philosopy, some just
> > won't. But to me that's acceptable, and the GPLv2, or indeed
> > Linus' tit-for-tat interpretation of the GPLv2, is IMHO
> > sufficient to protect my interests.
> 
> Err .. when you say protection on one hand and on the other you state
> it's hard to keep free loaders away, 

I didn't say that.

IMHO it isn't even useful to try to keep free loaders away,
it's better to try and integrate them gradually. That's part
of the game.
(Where "free loaders" is a term introduced by Alexandre, not by me.)

The GPLv2 is a sufficient tool to defend free software
against those that don't even grasp tit-for-tat. But if
they do, you can talk to them *as peers* and try to convince
them that there's more to free software than just tit-for-tat.
But it has to be their decision, IMHO it's wrong to force them.

The GPLv3 tries to be a tool to defend against those that
don't subscribe to the full Free Software Definition.


Johannes
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/