Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 20 Dec 1998 14:53:49 -0500 (EST) | From | "Mike A. Harris" <> | Subject | Re: Article: IBM wants to "clean up the license" of Linux |
| |
On 20 Dec 1998, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> >>> IBM needs a way to tightly bind a patent license to the source code. >> >>> Without that, they are afraid to contribute. IBM might even want to >> >>> specifically tie patents to Linux. (not also gcc, HURD, emacs...) >> >> >> >> Then we don't need/want anything from IBM. Let them die a slow >> >> death after Microsoft's own slow death from W2K. >> > >> >IBM gets thousands of patents every year. They have the one needed >> >for strong JPEG compression and the original (better) bzip. Oh yes, >> >we really do need things from IBM. >> > >> >It would be really stupid to not consider making them comfortable. >> >Maybe they would want too much, but at least we ought to be willing >> >to consider making a deal. They might just want less ambiguity. >> >> IBM is a commercial entity. They have commercial interests. The >> license of GPL software cannot and willnot change. There are >> some provisions for change of license, but most software is >> impossible to change license on due to the immense number of >> authors, and patch authors. This large number almost nails the >> GPL permanently in. I think this is good. > >Sure it can... virtually all GPL'd software is "GPL version 2, **or, >at your option, any later version**".
Correct. I was refering to GPL'd software becoming non-GPL though. If the GPL changes, that is different from what I meant.
-- Mike A. Harris - Computer Consultant - Linux advocate
Linux software galore: http://freshmeat.net
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |