linux-kernel - Re: That whole "Linux stealing our code" thing

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: <46DA1543.7030505@garzik.org>
Date:	Sat, 01 Sep 2007 21:43:31 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	"Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc@...il.com>
CC:	Jason Dixon <jason@...ongroup.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	jirislaby@...il.com, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: That whole "Linux stealing our code" thing

Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
> On 01/09/07, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
>> Jason Dixon wrote:
>>> Once the grantor (Reyk) releases his code under that license, it must
>>> remain.  You are free to derive work and redistribute under your
>>> license, but the original copyright and license permission remains
>>> intact.  Many other entities (Microsoft, Apple, Sun, etc) have used BSD
>>> code and have no problem understanding this.  Why is this so difficult
>>> for the Linux brain share to absorb?
>> Why is it so difficult to understand dual licensing?
> 
> Maybe because Reyk's code was never dual-licensed?

And yet a good portion of Theo's response, in particular his accusations 
of Alan Cox exhorting people to break the law, were directly related to 
dual licensing.

	Jeff



-
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/