linux-kernel - Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers

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]

Message-ID: <orire2mypb.fsf@free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Date:	Fri, 16 Feb 2007 03:57:36 -0200
From:	Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc:	"Michael K. Edwards" <medwards.linux@...il.com>,
	v j <vj.linux@...il.com>, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers

On Feb 16, 2007, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:

> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Feb 15, 2007, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Michael K. Edwards wrote:
>>>> On 2/15/07, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
>> 
>>>>> The /whole point/ of the GPL is to funnel contributions back.
>> 
>>>> Bzzzt.  The whole point of the GPL is to "guarantee your freedom to
>>>> share and change free software--to make sure the software is free for
>>>> all its users."
>> 
>>> No, that's the FSF marketing fluff you've been taught to recite.
>> 
>> The same FSF that wrote the GPL, no less ;-)
>> 
>>> I'm referring to the original reason why Linus chose the GPL

>> If he chose it for this reason, he chose the wrong license.

> Strange, then, how its been so successful in funelling back contributions.

There's nothing strange about it.  Promoting (as opposed to mandating)
contributions is a great possible, even probable consequence of the
GPL, but it is far from being the whole point of the GPL.

If Linus' whole point had been to funnel back contributions, assuming
he fully understood the GPL back when he chose it, he'd probably have
chosen a different license that *required* contributions to be
funneled back.  And then Linux would have remained non-Free Software.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member         http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@...dhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@...d.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
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/