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

Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-14T20:05:25Z

On Jun 14, 2007, "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok, consider non-derived work.

I did, you snipped it out:

>> If your change is not a derived work, you're not bound by the terms
>> of the GPL as far as the change is concerned, so the GPL has no say
>> whatsoever as to how you must release it. If you choose the GPL,
>> then you're a licensor, and the requirements to pass on all the
>> rights you have do not apply.

> Because I am distributing whole program
> I have to do it under GPL. However I still have the right to
> distribute just the portion that is written by me under whatevel
> license I want but you as a recepient of GPLed whole do not get this
> right. IOW I am not passing all the rights _I have_.

I see what you mean. IANAL, but I don't think that's how it works.

When your work is not a derived work, the GPL that applies to the rest
of the program does not make you a licensee, and it only covers your
work if you choose to license it that way. And then, you're the sole
licensor of that piece of the work.

--
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}