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, 17 Jun 2007 15:47:49 +0200
From:	bert hubert <bert.hubert@...herlabs.nl>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
	Bernd Schmidt <bernds_cb1@...nline.de>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net>,
	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, Jun 16, 2007 at 08:10:53PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> This is where we started. The same way you seem to think that "freedom" 
> has only the meaning *you* and the FSF give it, and that somehow the 
> spirit of the GPL includes the "four freedoms" that aren't even 
> _mentioned_ in it.
> 
> THAT IS NOT TRUE.

Compare for example the landmark case Griswold v. Connecticut where the US
supreme court, faced with a constitution that did not contain items they
desperately wanted it to contain, made up 'penumbras' and 'emanations'
stemming from the bill of rights, which then created the much sought after
guarantees of privacy for Americans.

 '[..] Specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by
 emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance. 
 Various guarantees create zones of privacy.'

 and

  'Although the Bill of Rights does not explicitly mention "privacy",
   Justice William O. Douglas (writing for the majority) ruled that the
   right was to be found in the "penumbras" of other constitutional
   protections.'

This was frowned upon back then as 'overly creative', and still is - but
because the constitution could not be changed, and nobody was willing to
amend it, they had no choice but to interpret so extensively.

This is not the case now however.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/griswold.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut

	Bert

-- 
http://www.PowerDNS.com      Open source, database driven DNS Software 
http://netherlabs.nl              Open and Closed source services
-
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/