linux-kernel - Re: GPLv3 Position Statement

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:	Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:46:12 +0200
From:	Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de>
To:	Jörn Engel <joern@...nheim.fh-wedel.de>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
	Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca>,
	Chase Venters <chase.venters@...entec.com>,
	Sergey Panov <sipan@...an.org>,
	Patrick McFarland <diablod3@...il.com>,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...eleye.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: GPLv3 Position Statement

On 2006.09.28 17:20:20 +0200, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Thu, 28 September 2006 08:04:13 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > No. I _really_ want to clarify this, because so many people get it wrong. 
> > Really.
> > 
> > The "GPLv2 only" wording is really just a clarification. You don't need it 
> > for the project to be "GPLv2 only".
> > 
> > If a project says: "This code is licensed under this copyright license" 
> > and then goes on to quote the GPLv2, then IT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE 
> > GPLv3!
> > 
> > Or if you just say "I license my code under the GPLv2", IT IS NOT 
> > COMPATIBLE WITH THE GPLv3.
> 
> And this is an area where I slightly disagree with you.  While I would
> hope that you were right, I can easily imagine a judge ruling that "v2
> or later" in the preamble means that the project just signed a blank
> license of the FSF's discretion.

The preamble does not say "v2 or later", that's only in "How To" section
which is not part of the terms and conditions. But section 9 is even
worse than "v2 or later". Linus' second exmaple is fine, it mentions v2
and therefore it actually is v2 only. But the first one means _any_ GPL
version, even older versions, as it does not mention any version and
section 9 says "If the Program does not specify a version number of
this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free
Software Foundation." ouch!

Björn

-
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/