From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S265248AbRFUVnq>; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 17:43:46 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S265254AbRFUVnh>; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 17:43:37 -0400
Received: from isimail.interactivesi.com ([207.8.4.3]:40966 "HELO
	dinero.interactivesi.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP
	id <S265248AbRFUVnU>; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 17:43:20 -0400
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 16:43:11 -0500
From: Timur Tabi <ttabi@interactivesi.com>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Controversy over dynamic linking -- how to end the panic
X-Mailer: The Polarbar Mailer; version=1.19a; build=73
Message-ID: <aiLYb.A.GGG.xpmM7@dinero.interactivesi.com>
X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.1 (http://amavis.org/)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

** Reply to message from Andrew Pimlott <andrew@pimlott.ne.mediaone.net> on
Thu, 21 Jun 2001 17:30:06 -0400


> I'm not sure whether you are right or wrong--but such a conclusion
> would be grossly unfair.  I think a strong case would be made that
> existing practice wrt Linux is independent of existing practice wrt
> GNU, and that everyone involved knows that Linus's GPL is not the
> FSF's GPL.  And I think that the FSF (and their lawyers) would
> advance this claim vigorously.

Well, that's a can of worms we DON'T want to open.  What's to stop Microsoft
from claiming their own interpretaion of the GPL?  The whole point behind the
GPL (and any license) is that it cannot be vaguely interpreted by various
individuals and companies.

> (Besides, it's really in nobody's best interest to take the GPL
> before a judge, so I think that rough consensus and community
> dynamics will continue to drive the interpretation of the GPL.)

Well, what if one company create a Linux application and used the "Linus GPL"
instead of the "FSF GPL" to defend its practices?  I think there's some
situation going on right now about an company that released a non-GPL Linux
media player (or something like that) that links in someone else's GPL code.

Besides, isn't the "Linus GPL" somewhere between the "FSF GPL" and the LGPL?


-- 
Timur Tabi - ttabi@interactivesi.com
Interactive Silicon - http://www.interactivesi.com


-- 
Timur Tabi - ttabi@interactivesi.com
Interactive Silicon - http://www.interactivesi.com