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

[alan]

On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Al Viro wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 08:13:54PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 2007, Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Obviously Linus feels that the spirit of the GPLv2 is exactly what
> > > he wanted
> >
> > spirit != letter.  He liked the letter.  He couldn't even tell spirit
> > from letter 2 or 3 days ago.
> >
> > The spirit is the motivations behind the author of the license.
> > Anyone who thinks the motivations of RMS and the FSF are not defending
> > users' freedoms, as defined in the Free Software Definition, hasn't
> > been around for very long.
>
> Aha.  I.e. "similar in spirit" means simply "written according to
> motivations of RMS and FSF".  Which means, of course, that RMS and
> FSF are the sole judges in that area.  There is just one problem:
> it's not vague enough to be stated openly in the license.  Can't
> scare the suckers away - that would reduce the user freedoms, right?

I always thought that the "Spirit of the GPL" runs around 180 proof and 
involves Laudanum.

--
"ANSI C says access to the padding fields of a struct is undefined.
ANSI C also says that struct assignment is a memcpy. Therefore struct
assignment in ANSI C is a violation of ANSI C..."
                                  - Alan Cox
-
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/