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

[Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 05:42:44PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 04:46:36PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> > Giving back "in kind" is obvious. I give you source code to do with as you 
> >> > see fit. I just expect you to give back in kind: source code for me to do 
> >> > with as I see fit, under the same license I gave you source code.
> >> 
> >> > How hard is that to accept?
> >> 
> >> Forgive me if I find this a bit hard, because that's *not* what the
> >> GPL says.
> 
> > What part of the word "expect" did you not understand?
> 
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/24/246
> 
>   It asks everybody - regardless of circumstance - for the same thing.
>   It asks for the effort that was put into improving the software to
>   be given back to the common good.  You can use the end result any
>   way you want (and if you want to use it for "bad" things, be my
>   guest), but we ask the same exact thing of everybody - give your
>   modifications back.
> 
> > And whats your point here anyway?
> 
> The the GPL doesn't do that.  It encourages that.  But what it asks
> for is respect for the freedoms it defends WRT the software licensed
> under it.

Reading the above you are writing exact the same as Linus here
but refusing to accept it and without usign the same words.

In the end of the day both things says: "please give back"
And the rest is just worthless nitpicking - in my local
language is it "flueknepperi".

	Sam