Re: When is the kernel moving to GPLv3? (probably feeding a troll :)

Re: When is the kernel moving to GPLv3? (probably feeding a troll :)

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 09:56:44AM -0700, Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
> /"Red Hat has slammed the door shut 
> <http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2059675,00.asp> on any possibility 
> of entering into a patent protection deal similar to the one Microsoft 
> recently announced with Novell, eWeek is reporting. While Microsoft has 
> repeatedly said it wants to work with Red Hat and would like to 
> structure a relationship where its customers can be assured of the same 
> thing as Novell's customers 
> <http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/06/11/02/1957252.shtml?tid=109> now 
> are, Mark Webbink, Red Hat's deputy general counsel, says 'we do not 
> believe there is a need for or basis for the type of relationship 
> defined in the Microsoft-Novell announcement.' Interestingly enough, 
> Microsoft also says that it has not ruled out going it alone and 
> providing some sort of indemnification for its customers who also use 
> Red Hat Linux."/
> 
> "Meanwhile, Eben Moglen, the FSF general counsel, promises that GPLv3 
> will explicitly outlaw 
> <http://money.cnn.com/blogs/legalpad/2006/11/is-microsoft-novell-deal-dead-on.html> 
> deals like this. (Of course everyone's on v2, so calling the Novell deal 
> "DOA" would be premature.)"
> 
> So when is the kernel moving to GPLv3?   I have seen some discussions 
> about moving off v2, is there concensus about moving to v3 to remove
> threats of patent claims against v2 code by M$ and others who may use 
> Linux in hardware based projects.

The "consensus" seems to be: The kernel is currently GPLv2 (and nothing
else) and changing that is almost an imposible task, and the majority of
the major active contributers also don't seem interested in considering
the GPLv3 in its current form.  It really seems to be that simple.

Some people claim Novell's "Deal" isn't even permitted under the GPLv2,
or that the "Deal" has no meaning or purpose at all.

--
Len Sorensen

[ot] (was When is the kernel moving to GPLv3?)

[Oleg Verych]

On 2006-11-16, Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
[]
> So when is the kernel moving to GPLv3?   I have seen some discussions 
> about moving off v2, is there concensus about moving to v3 to remove
> threats of patent claims against v2 code by M$ and others who may use 
> Linux in hardware based projects.

Archives, man, search archives, and get off OT, please.
<http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&w=2&r=1&s=GPLv3&q=b>
I guess, you know who is the Author, thus select messages.
____

When is the kernel moving to GPLv3?

[Jeffrey V. Merkey]

/"Red Hat has slammed the door shut 
<http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2059675,00.asp> on any possibility 
of entering into a patent protection deal similar to the one Microsoft 
recently announced with Novell, eWeek is reporting. While Microsoft has 
repeatedly said it wants to work with Red Hat and would like to 
structure a relationship where its customers can be assured of the same 
thing as Novell's customers 
<http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/06/11/02/1957252.shtml?tid=109> now 
are, Mark Webbink, Red Hat's deputy general counsel, says 'we do not 
believe there is a need for or basis for the type of relationship 
defined in the Microsoft-Novell announcement.' Interestingly enough, 
Microsoft also says that it has not ruled out going it alone and 
providing some sort of indemnification for its customers who also use 
Red Hat Linux."/

"Meanwhile, Eben Moglen, the FSF general counsel, promises that GPLv3 
will explicitly outlaw 
<http://money.cnn.com/blogs/legalpad/2006/11/is-microsoft-novell-deal-dead-on.html> 
deals like this. (Of course everyone's on v2, so calling the Novell deal 
"DOA" would be premature.)"

So when is the kernel moving to GPLv3?   I have seen some discussions 
about moving off v2, is there concensus about moving to v3 to remove
threats of patent claims against v2 code by M$ and others who may use 
Linux in hardware based projects.

Jeff

Re: When is the kernel moving to GPLv3? (probably feeding a troll :)

[Jeffrey V. Merkey]

Lennart Sorensen wrote:

>The "consensus" seems to be: The kernel is currently GPLv2 (and nothing
>else) and changing that is almost an imposible task, and the majority of
>the major active contributers also don't seem interested in considering
>the GPLv3 in its current form.  It really seems to be that simple.
>
>Some people claim Novell's "Deal" isn't even permitted under the GPLv2,
>or that the "Deal" has no meaning or purpose at all.
>
>  
>

There exists sufficient precedence and case law to assert this position 
as accurate. It would take
a patent infringement case where GPL code was being distributed to 
establish it as a matter of law.
I can guarantee Novell and M$ will avoid any such suit for that very reason.

It may all be moot and not really matter, other than for FUD factor by 
Novell/M$.

Jeff

>--
>Len Sorensen
>
>  
>