From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268644AbTGIXOd (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jul 2003 19:14:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268682AbTGIXOd (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jul 2003 19:14:33 -0400 Received: from ns1.cypress.com ([157.95.67.4]:22935 "EHLO ns1.cypress.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268644AbTGIXOc (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jul 2003 19:14:32 -0400 Message-ID: <3F0CA535.8030708@cypress.com> Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 18:28:53 -0500 From: Thomas Dodd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4u; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030701 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux Kernel Mailing List CC: Miles Bader , Andre Hedrick Subject: Re: Dell vs. GPL 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 Miles Bader wrote: > Andre Hedrick writes: >>GPL loses, maybe better so it can be replaced with OSL and then it gets >>serious because we will have teeth to defend the ideas of open source. > > > The `copyright registration' requirements, whatever they are, would > seem to apply equally to the GPL and whatever other `OSL' you have, so > why on earth would some court loss related to copyright registration > have any effect on what license people choose? Either license would still reguire registration for enforcement. But the _new_ license, like OSL, would "will have teeth to defend", and stand up in court since the GPL didn't. A new GPL might also come about that is strong enough, but you still need the legal power to defend it. -Thomas