Re: Switching to the OSL License, in a dual way.

From: viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk
To: Dean McEwan <dean.mcewan@eudoramail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Switching to the OSL License, in a dual way.
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 12:30:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030724113022.GA12757@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <HJLHINMLOKGNEEAA@whowhere.com>

On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 08:40:48AM +0000, Dean McEwan wrote:
>  After recently reading Mr. Stallman's online *BLURB*
> at www.stallman.org, specifically the diary entry
> on June 28th 2003, I am disturbed, I would like to
> work on helping you people move to a OSL licence,
> work out copyright owners and add the OSL option to each 
> individual file one by one.

<quote>
Also note that the GPL below is copyrighted by the Free Software
Foundation, but the instance of code that it refers to (the Linux
kernel) is copyrighted by me and others who actually wrote it.
Also note that the only valid version of the GPL as far as the kernel
is concerned is _this_ particular version of the license (ie v2, not
v2.2 or v3.x or whatever), unless explicitly otherwise stated.

                        Linus Torvalds
</quote>

Which makes FSF, let alone personal views of RMS, deeply irrelevant
as far as Linux kernel is concerned.

FWIW, I'm not particulary fond of GPL, but I will *not* accomodate
the kooks with agenda.  IOW, you are politely advised to take your
crusade and shove it up the place where both your and RMS's heads
are wedged in.  I can't speak for anybody else, but I neither need
nor welcome "help" from ideologists of any persuasion.