Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-16T01:41:35Z

On Jun 15, 2007, "Scott Preece" <sepreece@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 6/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > * Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@enter.net> wrote:
>>
>> That's correct, but with a catch: since the contract or license is
>> chosen by the licensor, in case of ambiguity in the terms, many courts
>> will interpret it in a way that privileges the licensee, regardless of
>> the fact that copyright licenses are to be interpreted restrictively
>> (at least in Brazilian law). And IANAL ;-)
> ---

> Hmm. In such a suit, however, the user would not be "the licensee" and
> would not be a party to the suit - some author would be the plaintiff
> and would be suing someone for doing something in violation of the
> license that author granted - that is, the *defendant* would be the
> licensee who would get the benefit of the doubt...

Yes. And so justice is made. Licensor gets to pick the license,
licensee gets the benefit of the doubt. What's the 'however' about?
Was this not obvious?

--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}