Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Jun 14, 2007, "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ok, consider non-derived work.

I did, you snipped it out:

>> If your change is not a derived work, you're not bound by the terms
>> of the GPL as far as the change is concerned, so the GPL has no say
>> whatsoever as to how you must release it.  If you choose the GPL,
>> then you're a licensor, and the requirements to pass on all the
>> rights you have do not apply.

> Because I am distributing whole program
> I have to do it under GPL. However I still have the right to
> distribute just the portion that is written by me under whatevel
> license I want but you as a recepient of GPLed whole do not get this
> right. IOW I am not passing all the rights _I have_.

I see what you mean.  IANAL, but I don't think that's how it works.

When your work is not a derived work, the GPL that applies to the rest
of the program does not make you a licensee, and it only covers your
work if you choose to license it that way.  And then, you're the sole
licensor of that piece of the work.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member         http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
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/