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:	Sun, 10 Jun 2007 09:04:55 -0400
From:	Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...os.cz>
Cc:	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@...one.net.tr>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

On Sunday 10 June 2007 08:45:41 Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
> > I presume the heirs of the dead people could change the license.  And if
> > they have no heir, then there is no-one to sue for breach of copyright,
> > so I assume the copyright lapses.
>
> In most of the law systems out there the copyright stays valid for 70
> years (or so) after the holder's death.

I'm almost certain that it is the same in the US, not the death+90 previously 
stated. (I've read the copyright laws a number of times to deal with some 
involved conversations) In some of the writings tied the change that made it 
death+70 its stated that said change was made to "bring US laws in line with 
Europe and most of the rest of the world" (paraphrase - I didn't bother going 
and digging out the page again). It's a relatively common belief - and, IIRC, 
was even brought before the US Supreme Court - that the copyrights length was 
changed to give Disney longer protection, if just because a lot of Disney's 
copyrights were going to expire and the change was applied retroactively. 
(And, unsurprisingly, the suit was shot down - 70 years is still a "limited" 
period. However, IIRC, there was some noted concern by the Supreme Court that 
the US Congress would exploit the legal loophole and just keep extending the 
copyright period retroactively to make it, effectively, never-ending. That 
scenario, while not *technically* in violation of the language of the US 
Constitution (which grants the US Congress the power to set the length of 
copyrights) would violate the spirit of it)

DRH
-
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/