[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Viro: "I'd recommend asking FSF legal folk
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Viro: "I'd recommend asking FSF legal folks" |
Date: |
Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:39:40 +0200 |
Al Viro wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 01:26:54AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > On Jun 21, 2007, Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:00:22PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > >> Do you agree that if there's any single contributor who thinks it
> > >> can't be tivoized, and he manages his opinion to prevail in court
> > >> against a copyright holder, then it can't? That this is the same
> > >> privilege to veto additional permissions that Al Viro has just
> > >> claimed?
> >
> > > You know, I'm rapidly losing any respect for your integrity. The only
> > > "privelege" claimed is that of not relicensing one's contributions.
> >
> > No, this thread was about additional permissions to combine with other
> > licenses. I didn't suggest anything about relicensing whatsoever,
> > that's all noise out of not understanding the suggestion.
>
> And that constitutes the change of license. If you *really* do not understand
> that, I'd recommend asking FSF legal folks, especially since you have
> mentioned working on v3. And that, BTW, is far more serious detail than
> your affiliation (or lack thereof) with FSF. Don't forget to bring a copy
> of your posting that had started this thread when you talk to them.
>
> And really, stop digging. Please. YANAL. You are definitely not in
> position to offer any specific changes in v3. Are you seriously expecting
> an ACK on your handwaving, when conditions mentioned in your patch to
> license are not just vague as hell, but are 100% certain to be interpreted
> in conflicting ways as shown by the previous thread?
>
> What are you expecting, anyway? "You guys can link to v3 code if you read
> v2 as prohibiting tivoization, otherwise the code is withdrawn" != "some
> people think that v2 prohibits it, some do not". And somehow I doubt that
> this change of situation will make the latter happy.
>
> Besides, what you are suggesting is logistical nightmare. Somebody in
> v3 project changes borrowed v2 code. Result is pulled back into Linux.
> What is the license of that thing? v3 with additional permission? v2
> with additional permission? What happens if code is then rewritten, with
> some pieces remaining from v3 changes? Oh, you want to deal only with
> entire modules? And then both sides need to be damn careful not to copy
> pieces across the module boundary?
>
> Suppose ZFS _is_ pulled into the tree via that mechanism. Just what
> will happen if some code is massaged a bit, found generically useful
> and lifted into a helper function? Do other filesystems (v2 ones)
> calling it suddenly get into patent violations?
>
> Just what makes you think that anybody would like that kind of "cooperation"?
> -
regards,
alexander.
--
"Live cheaply," he said, offering some free advice. "Don't buy a house,
a car or have children. The problem is they're expensive and you have
to spend all your time making money to pay for them."
-- Free Software Foundation's Richard Stallman: 'Live Cheaply'
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Viro: "How many GPL spirits can dance on the end of a pin?", (continued)
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Viro: "How many GPL spirits can dance on the end of a pin?", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/19
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Comment 3380: Combining propietary and GPL code, Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/21
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Rosen: "Comments on GPLv3", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/21
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Comment 3452: This hurts both users and hardware vendors, Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/22
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Comment 3446: Saving provision, Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/22
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Brazilian GNUtian Oliva: "how about mutual compatibility between Linux's GPLv2 and GPLv3?", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/22
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Viro: "Permission denied", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/22
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Oliva: "Two-way cooperation", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/22
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Viro: "Do piss off. You know full well what I'm saying.", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/22
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Oliva: "additional permissions to combine", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/22
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Viro: "I'd recommend asking FSF legal folks",
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Brazilian GNUtian Oliva: "the GPL is not a contract, it's a license", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/22
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- eWeek: "Is Open Source Dying?", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/23
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- IT Business Edge: "Rosen: GPL Is Good, but OSL Is Better", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/26
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- IT Business Edge: "Rosen: GPL Is Good, but OSL Is Better", Ciaran O'Riordan, 2007/06/26
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Luis Villa's GPL v3 Q&A (PART 1), Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/26
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- CRN: "GPL 3 Set To Go Live", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/28
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Gardner: "GPL v3 due Friday don't trip over the lawyers at the Apple Store", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/29
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- FSF: "iPhone restricts users, GPLv3 frees them", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/29
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- FSF: "GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 3, 29 June 2007", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/29
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- FSF: "GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 3, 29 June 2007", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/06/29