Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux
Kurt Garloff (K.Garloff@ping.de)
Wed, 30 Dec 1998 09:53:17 +0100
On Tue, Dec 29, 1998 at 03:58:19PM -0500, C S Hendrix wrote:
> > > > AFAIR that statement is recommended to append to your program's
> > > > source and/or display. If you say "This program is GPL version 2
> > > > period" I believe it is then GPL 2 period, regardless of wether a
> > > > 3 comes out. Richard, do you care to clarify this?
> > >
> > > I don't even see how this can be legal. As far as I know no contract
> > > or license can make you agree to something that has not yet been
> > > written.
> >
> > Yawn . Read the entire document carefully before making statements. Its quite
> > clear about when it applies and you having the right to opt out.
>
> I have read it, and I still think it is at least inconsistent.
>
> Also, I was commenting on the idea that a new license can be applied
> to without the owner's consent. I don't think that is legal.
> If the GPL does that, it can't be legal. If it doesn't, then fine.
I don't think this would be fine.
Either that particular clause would be invalid, OK, fine.
Or it would render the whole licence agreement invalid, which would be very
bad, as it would destroy most of the free software to be protected by the GPL.
--
Kurt Garloff <kurt@garloff.de> [Dortmund, FRG]
Plasma physics, high perf. computing [Linux-ix86,-axp, DUX]
PGP key on http://www.garloff.de/kurt/ [Linux SCSI driver: DC390]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/