From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268293AbUJGV5j (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Oct 2004 17:57:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268360AbUJGV4y (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Oct 2004 17:56:54 -0400 Received: from c7ns3.center7.com ([216.250.142.14]:15053 "EHLO smtp.slc03.viawest.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268293AbUJGVxB (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Oct 2004 17:53:01 -0400 Message-ID: <4165B212.1070602@drdos.com> Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 15:16:02 -0600 From: "Jeff V. Merkey" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040510 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rik van Riel Cc: Alan Cox , jonathan@jonmasters.org, "jmerkey@comcast.net" , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Possible GPL Violation of Linux in Amstrad's E3 Videophone References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Rik van Riel wrote: >On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > > > >>We offer to kernel.org the sum of $50,000.00 US for a one time >>license to the Linux Kernel Source for a single snapshot of >>a single Linux version by release number. >> >> > >That would still be useless, since it doesn't give you any >rights to the (GPL) bug fixes posted to this list on an >almost daily basis. > > > Obviously, what would happen here is a release of 2.4 or 2.6 that is stable would be snapshoted and used. And yes, you are correct, bug fixes would not be allowed unless they were applied independently and without access to GPL code. However, this would allow OSDL and kernel.org to become self-sustaining and would not impact the GPL process -- just let you guys peel off releases and pocket some $$$ on the side. A lot of big companies would line up to pay you. So, who do I write the check to? Jeff