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

Daniel Hazelton
2007-06-16T04:10:25Z

On Friday 15 June 2007 22:16:30 Bron Gondwana wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:26:34PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 2007, Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > What happens if you're debugging something you think is a bug in the
> > > Linux kernel and then you run bang into some interactions that make you
> > > think the bug might be in the BIOS instead.
> > >
> > > have denied your freedom to modify and debug the system they sold you
> >
> > If the bug is in the non-GPLed BIOS, not in the GPLed code, too bad.
> > One more reason to dislike non-Free Software.
>
> If the bug is in the non-GPLed binary module, not in the GPLed code, too
> bad. One more reason to dislike non-Free Software.
>
> It's the same argument from the other direction. The BIOS is linked
> (inside the machine, sure) to the kernel for all intents and purposes
> through a defined interface. This doesn't affect the BIOS developers
> who ship me a machine on to which I then install Linux, but it _does_
> affect a hardware vendor who ships me a system with Linux pre-installed,
> because it could easily be argued that they linked the BIOS with the
> Linux kernel and hence produced a combined work (remember, they reserve
> the right to modify the BIOS, but don't give that that right to me) and
> the BIOS should now come under the GPL.

This is the point that was being made, IMHO. But thank you for explaining it
for the people that either could not understand, or will not willing to
understand, the original point that was made.

DRH

>
> Talk about your chilling effects. It's a strong reason for vendors not
> to ship GPL3 or GPL2[your interpretation] code pre-installed while the
> legal boundaries of work combination are in any way grey.
>
> Regards,
>
> Bron.

--
Dialup is like pissing through a pipette. Slow and excruciatingly painful.