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]

Message-Id: <1182020744.21803.850.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Sun, 17 Jun 2007 03:05:44 +0800
From:	Tim Post <tim.post@...kinetics.net>
To:	Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net>
Cc:	Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	debian developer <debiandev@...il.com>, david@...g.hm,
	Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@...one.net.tr>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 14:43 -0400, Daniel Hazelton wrote:

> >
> > You mean renting the computer with the software in it is not
> > distribution of the software?
> 
> It is. But you don't have the same rights to a rented machine as you do to one 
> you have purchased. In fact, in renting a machine you have to agree to 
> a "renters contract" - and that can state *whatever* the person that is 
> renting the machine to you feels like having it state.

I ended up owning a piece of &*@( I rented from rent-a-center on a trip
because I wiped Windows and installed Debian.

> And yes, they can even 
> have terms in it that violate the GPL. Not that a "renters contract" ("rental 
> agreement" or whatever they call them in your jurisdiction) that has those 
> terms can *legally* violate the GPL - but it doesn't stop them from existing.

I think you could be right. You (in 99% of all cases) agree to not
modify the machine anyway upon accepting it. Since you sign your rights
away at the minimum it would cost big time to enforce the license,
especially against a giant franchise.

That doesn't stop you from just letting people do what they want. If it
were me, I'd let people and that has nothing to do with the spirit of
the GPL, Windows is annoying and I wouldn't force someone to use it.

Probably, I'd just let them pick what they wanted and install it for
them.

I don't think they rent law degrees to go with computers however, you
have to get the blender or juicer to get that special.

Best,
--Tim

-
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/