Re: Maybe it's time to fork the GPL License - create the Linux license?

[Marc Perkel <marc@perkel.com>]

  Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> It's mentioned in the preamble, but it is actually a part of the license 
> tag you put in your code. </nitpick>
>
>
> Jan Engelhardt
>   

Yep - and if it's in there it creates confusion. Anyhow - I just threw 
the idea out there because even though the GPL2 has served the community 
well there comes a point where if RMS has evolved into more f a 
hinderence than a help to the cause and if he is going to dig in and be 
unreasonable then the idea of forking the license becomes more 
thinkable. I would feel more comfortable if say Larry Lessig of Creative 
Commons in combination with perhaps with EFF we in charge of license 
development. These are more trusted organization with serious legal 
minds who can write a license that actually protects our interests in a 
way that will hold up in courts.

So far the GPL2 is doing fine but it occasionally needs a little tweak 
to make it more accurate. One of those tweaks is that the preamble lose 
the "or later" clause.

Maybe RMS will get the message and realize that the Linux voice must be 
heard and he will return to some kind of sanity on this. I don't think 
it's time yet to fork the GPL but I think it's time to talk about the 
possibility if GPL3 doesn't change. I think that GPL3 is so 
substantially different than GPL2 that it should not have the same name. 
So if GPL3 doesn't change then I vote fork.