RE: GPL V3 and Linux - Dead Copyright Holders

[David Schwartz]

> On Thursday 02 February 2006 02:11, David Schwartz wrote:

> > 	The reason you can't modify the GPL, even we assume the GPL
> > is licensed
> > under the GPL, is because the GPL says you can't modify the GPL.

>      So you're saying that the two lines that are the GPL's copyright
> license, are also part of the terms and conditions of the GPL, and act in
> that capacity as a restriction of what you can do under Section 2? That's
> an interesting argument, I might agree.

	Yes, the GPL is the license agreement for both the GPL and anything
licensed under the GPL.

> > 	It is logically impossible for the GPL to be GPL-incompatible. To be
> > GPL-incomptabile, a license would have to contain requirements or
> > restrictions not found in the GPL. How could the GPL possibly do that?

>      It's not the GPL doing that, it's the GPL's license. But perhaps the
> restrictions of the license are also restrictions of the GPL,
> they are part
> of the text of that document after all.

	I have no idea what you mean by the "GPL's license". If it's contained in
the GPL, it's part of the GPL. The GPL is all of a piece.

	DS


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/