[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: GPL V3 and Linux - Dead Copyright Holders

    On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, Pierre Ossman wrote:
    > So taking open software and closed hardware and combining it into something
    > that I cannot modify is ok by you?

    But you CAN modify the software part of it. You can run it on other

    It boils down to this: we wrote the software. That's the only part _I_
    care about, and perhaps (at least to me) more importantly, because it's
    the only part we created, it's the only part that I feel we have a moral
    right to control.

    I _literally_ feel that we do not - as software developers - have the
    moral right to enforce our rules on hardware manufacturers. We are not
    crusaders, trying to force people to bow to our superior God. We are
    trying to show others that co-operation and openness works better.

    That's my standpoint, at least. Always has been. It's the reason I
    chose the GPL in the first place (and it's the exact same reason that I
    wrote the original Linux copyright license). I do _software_, and I
    license _software_.

    And I realize that others don't always agree with me. That's fine. You
    don't have to. But I licensed my project under a license _I_ agreed with,
    which is the GPLv2. Others who feel differently can license under their
    own licenses. Including, very much, the GPLv3.

    I'm not arguing against the GPLv3.

    I'm arguing that the GPLv3 is wrong for _me_, and it's not the license I
    ever chose.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.020 / U:41.776 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site