[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "I'd be a total moron to relicense
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "I'd be a total moron to relicense the kernel under what I believe is a worse license" |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Jun 2007 20:47:01 +0200 |
I'm almost inclined to donate some EUROs to RMS/FSF and Eben's "law firm"
SFLC for all that fun... <chuckles>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >
> > > In other words, Red Hat distributes copies (and yes, you *get* that copy),
> > > and you cannot modify that copy that you got.
> >
> > And Red Hat can't either. I thought that was quite obvious.
>
> That's TOTALLY IRRELEVANT!
>
> There is no language in the GPLv2 (only in the GPLv3 drafts) about "same
> upgradability as third parties".
>
> You're arguing a point that DOES NOT EXIST in the GPLv2.
>
> The GPLv2 talks about specific rights, like the ability to make changes
> and distribute things, and says that you have to give downstream all those
> same rights.
>
> And I've pointed out to you (now about five times) that those rights
> CANNOT be able "in-place", since even Red Hat does not actually give you
> the right to do in-place modification of the software they sell.
>
> > The 'passing on the rights you have' makes it an issue.
>
> No. It does not.
>
> I have extra rights as a copyright holder, and that "the rights you have"
> are as they pertain to the software under the GPLv2, not as it pertains to
> the physical device, or outside the GPLv2.
>
> For example, for any code that I have full copyright over, I have rights
> that you DO NOT HAVE! I have the right to re-license it under some other
> license. The fact that I pass on a copy of the software to you under the
> GPLv2 does *not* give you those rights, but that's not even what the GPLv2
> asks for!
>
> The GPLv2, when it talks about "passing on the rights", talks about the
> rights you got *per*the*GPLv2*.
>
> Any other reading is nonsensical, since the copyrigth owner *always* has
> more rights than a licensee! I legally literally *couldn't* pass over all
> the rights I have to my software! If you read the GPLv2 as meaning that I
> have to, you are mis-reading it. It's that simple.
>
> Anyway, I'm not interested in continuing this flame war.
>
> The fact is, the license for the kernel is the GPLv2. And I think it's a
> superior license. As such, I'd be a total moron to relicense the kernel
> under what I believe is a worse license.
>
> So if you want to argue that I should re-license, you should argue that
> the GPLv3 is better. And quite frankly, you haven't.
>
> Linus
regards,
alexander.
--
"Live cheaply," he said, offering some free advice. "Don't buy a house,
a car or have children. The problem is they're expensive and you have
to spend all your time making money to pay for them."
-- Free Software Foundation's Richard Stallman: 'Live Cheaply'
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- InformationWeek: "Pick Your Open Source Poison: Microsoft's Patent Claims Or GPLv3", (continued)
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- InformationWeek: "Pick Your Open Source Poison: Microsoft's Patent Claims Or GPLv3", Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2007/06/11
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- InformationWeek: "Pick Your Open Source Poison: Microsoft's Patent Claims Or GPLv3", sourceview, 2007/06/11
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- InformationWeek: "Pick Your Open Source Poison: Microsoft's Patent Claims Or GPLv3", Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2007/06/11
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- INQUIRER: "Torvalds remains unconvinced by GPL3", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/12
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- INQUIRER: "Torvalds remains unconvinced by GPL3", Arnoud Engelfriet, 2007/06/12
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- INQUIRER: "Torvalds remains unconvinced by GPL3", rjack, 2007/06/12
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Sin's Schwartz to Linus: "I invite you to my house for dinner. I'll cook, you bring the wine.", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/13
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- BSD's de Raadt to Sin's Schwartz: "let me give an example of the duplicity of Sun", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/13
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linux-Watch: "Linspire, Microsoft in Linux-related deal", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "I'm damn fed up with the FSF", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "I'd be a total moron to relicense the kernel under what I believe is a worse license",
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Eben: "Lawyers licensed to practice in any country are invited", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "You're a moron. I'm the original author", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "I'm intelligent", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "It's about keeping *me* happy ... Your *IDIOTIC* suggestion is explicitly against the whole POINT!", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "the current GPLv3 draft looks fine apart from ... Just google for torvalds tit-for-tat ... I don't ask for money.", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/14
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Brownawell: "GPLv3, DFSG, Tivo, and GPLv3 (a different part of it)", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- dot Communist Eben meets Indian Marxist-Leninist (his life after GPLv3 so to speak :-) ), Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "GPLv2 does not state that you have to become a slave of rms", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus: "I've been told by several independent sources..." (re "GPLv2 is not a 'contract' but a 'pure copyright license'"), Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Landley: "Not Going There (tm)" (re 'license' vs 'contract'), Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/16