From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758573AbXIBRqy (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 13:46:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754160AbXIBRqr (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 13:46:47 -0400 Received: from ms-smtp-06.texas.rr.com ([24.93.47.45]:33786 "EHLO ms-smtp-06.texas.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752964AbXIBRqr (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 13:46:47 -0400 Message-ID: <46DAF70E.9060800@austin.rr.com> Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 12:46:54 -0500 From: "Jonathan A. George" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (X11/20070824) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: "GPL weasels and the atheros stink" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org While the title of Marc's email might be construed as flame bait, it is disappointing to see that the generally very valid points he has made (as both a BSD _and_ _GPL_ developer) are being ignored. To make it simple try answering these two questions: ---- Question #1: Is it _ethical_ (legality aside) to take someone else's actively maintained work (for example an OpenBSD driver) and make changes which can not be shared/used by the original developer/maintainer? Answer #1: Considering that the whole reason I personally choose the GPL for some projects is to prevent this sort of one way street behavior _away_ from the original OSS developers/contributors _my_ answer must be; No it is not ethical. ---- Question #2: Is it _technically beneficial_ to branch an OSS work (for example an OpenBSD driver) in such a way as to diminish the ability to share contributions between projects? Answer #2: It would be fascinating (and sad) to see an attempt at justifying a yes response to this question. Please don't let the rude language or defensiveness bought out by this particular incident distract from doing the right thing. Just because you legally can (or might be able to) do something doesn't make it right. --Jonathan-- P.S. As a secondary concern; it could be legally dubious with some governments to relicense an existing file from the OpenBSD license (given that the copyright license must remain intact) -- though patches could themselves _technically_ be GPL. Creating _new_ GPL files which work _with_ the existing BSD licensed has no such ambiguity, but please see questions #1 and #2 above -- is it the _right_ thing to do?