[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gNewSense-users] KFV question no licence or author

From: Karl Goetz
Subject: Re: [gNewSense-users] KFV question no licence or author
Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 08:35:46 +1030

On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 17:47 -0400, Bake Timmons wrote:
> >> It seems that we do *not* have to ask the author at all, since he has
> >> already granted us the choice(*), and we choose GPLv2 to be compatible
> >> with the Torvald's choice for the larger work.  Now if we wanted to
> >> distribute such a file as GPLv3, then I would ask the author, because we
> >> can only assume that he had the Linux kernel in mind when he used that
> >> language.
> >> 
> > Is this going to be our official practice? If so, we should change the
> > DocumentingYourWork site and maybe add it as an option in the kfv.el
> > program.

A work "Under the GPL" needs no clarification. a work without a
copyright notice should get clarificatio.

> Rethinking the license issue, I now think that it is not really the
> author *directly* granting *us* something.  What happens is that anyone
> contributing to the Linux kernel "under the GPL" grants rights to a
> distributor, namely Linus Torvalds.  Torvalds in turn distributes it to
> the world.  Since Torvalds chooses GPLv2 only, our rights are narrowed
> by this *chain* of distribution.  We can only choose GPLv2.  Please
> correct me if I am missing something here.

We can only distribute under GPL2 in the context of Linux. if you take
the same  GPL'd code (with no GPL version specified) you could then
include it in a GPL3 project and distribute it as GPL3.


> _______________________________________________
> gNewSense-users mailing list
> address@hidden
Karl Goetz <address@hidden>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]