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

alan
2007-06-16T00:00:32Z

On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Al Viro wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 08:13:54PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 15, 2007, Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Obviously Linus feels that the spirit of the GPLv2 is exactly what
>>> he wanted
>>
>> spirit != letter. He liked the letter. He couldn't even tell spirit
>> from letter 2 or 3 days ago.
>>
>> The spirit is the motivations behind the author of the license.
>> Anyone who thinks the motivations of RMS and the FSF are not defending
>> users' freedoms, as defined in the Free Software Definition, hasn't
>> been around for very long.
>
> Aha. I.e. "similar in spirit" means simply "written according to
> motivations of RMS and FSF". Which means, of course, that RMS and
> FSF are the sole judges in that area. There is just one problem:
> it's not vague enough to be stated openly in the license. Can't
> scare the suckers away - that would reduce the user freedoms, right?

I always thought that the "Spirit of the GPL" runs around 180 proof and
involves Laudanum.

--
"ANSI C says access to the padding fields of a struct is undefined.
ANSI C also says that struct assignment is a memcpy. Therefore struct
assignment in ANSI C is a violation of ANSI C..."
- Alan Cox