linux-kernel - Re: Maybe it's time to fork the GPL License

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <cd09bdd10610021126y371ddd86w130a75898fa64875@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 2 Oct 2006 13:26:54 -0500
From:	"James Dickens" <jamesd.wi@...il.com>
To:	"Patrick McFarland" <diablod3@...il.com>
Cc:	"Marc Perkel" <marc@...kel.com>,
	"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Maybe it's time to fork the GPL License - create the Linux license?

On 10/2/06, Patrick McFarland <diablod3@...il.com> wrote:
> On Monday 02 October 2006 04:55, Marc Perkel wrote:
> > Just a thought. Suppose we forked the GPL2 license and created the Linux
> > license? (Or some better name) It's kind of clear the Stallman has his
> > own ajenda and that it's not compatible with the Linux model. So - lets
> > fork it an start a new one.
> >
> > The idea of the new license is as follows. It would be backwards
> > compatible with GPL2. It's would eliminate the "or later" clause because
> > we have already seen the potential for abuse there. How can one agree to
> > future licenses without knowing what they are going to be? The other
> > feature is that the license is only modified to provide legal
> > clarification or to deal with future issues that occur as a result of
> > new technology or circumstances that we don't know about yet. If the
> > licenses is modified then copyright holders would then have to
> > explicitly declare that they accept the modifications by switching to
> > the new terms.
>
> I'd be behind such a license if it was 100% functionally equivalent to the GPL
> (ie, a reword just to get around the FSF Copyright of the GPL). I'd even
> license my own code under it.
>
it doesn't matter, how compatible it is, there is still the problem
that all past code submitters would have to agree to it. Since they
submitted their code to be  gpl v2.

James Dickens
uadmin.blogspot.com

> Linus, you want to chime in here?
>
> --
> Patrick McFarland || http://AdTerrasPerAspera.com
> "Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids,
> we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and
> listening to repetitive electronic music." -- Kristian Wilson, Nintendo,
> Inc, 1989
>
> -
> 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/
>
-
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/