[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d120d5000706150619r238b6c51r8203331a72d16b93@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:19:38 -0400
From: "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: "Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: "Bernd Paysan" <bernd.paysan@....de>,
"Alexandre Oliva" <aoliva@...hat.com>,
"Paulo Marques" <pmarques@...popie.com>,
"Al Viro" <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
"Krzysztof Halasa" <khc@...waw.pl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
On 6/15/07, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> O> GPL itself does not. But the author(s) may when they specify "any
> > later version", "dual GPL/BSD", etc. In this case (IMHO) distributor
> > in fact relicenses the code and may reduce license to sipmply BSD or
> > simply GPL, or "GPL v3 from now on". To "restore" license you would
> > need to go upstream and get the code from there.
>
> I don't see anything in the GPL that permits a redistributor to change
> the licence a piece of code is distributed under. If my code is GPL v2 or
> later you cannot take away the "or later" unless explicitly granted
> powers by the author to vary the licence.
>
> What you most certainly can do is modify it and decide your modifications
> are GPLv3 only thus creating a derived work which is GPLv3 only. However
> anyone receiving your modified version and reverting the modifications is
> back at v2 or later.
>
Yes, I agree. When I am saying "distributor" it is someone like RedHat
or TiVO who do modify the code, not merely use it in ints original
form.
--
Dmitry
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists