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

Dmitry Torokhov
2007-06-14T19:00:27Z

On 6/14/07, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 6/14/07, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> On Jun 14, 2007, Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@insightbb.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Wednesday 13 June 2007 21:59, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> >> For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
> >> >> gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients
> >> >> all the rights that you have.
> >> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>
> >> > So if I am a sole author of a program and I chose to distribute it under
> >> > GPL
> >>
> >> then you're not a licensee, you're a licensor, and these terms don't
> >> apply to you.
>
> > Heh. When you change a GPLed program and pass your changes you are the
> > licensor for the new code. You still have a right and license pieces
> > of the code you wrote under different license but you do not pass that
> > right to recepient of modified work.
>
> You are the author of the change, and you can license them however you
> like.
[... skip...]
>
> Derived work or not, when you combine that change with the program,
> then you're bound by the terms of the license, and then you cannot
> change the licensing terms of the whole program, so you can't pass
> this right on either.
>

Ok, consider non-derived work. 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_.

--
Dmitry