From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
To: david@lang.hm
Cc: jimmy bahuleyan <knight.camelot@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: how about mutual compatibility between Linux's GPLv2 and GPLv3?
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 17:02:52 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <orlkedjcsz.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706211055160.31603@asgard.lang.hm> (david@lang.hm's message of "Thu\, 21 Jun 2007 11\:00\:40 -0700 \(PDT\)")
On Jun 21, 2007, david@lang.hm wrote:
> this is standard dual-licensing, not special just becouse both
> licenses are GPL versions
No, seriously, it's not, it's quite different.
If you dual-license your code between GPLv2 and GPLv3, I could combine
your code with code under GPLv3, distribute it, and if anyone tivoized
your code, I might be able to enforce the anti-tivoization provisions
against the tivoizer.
With a mere permission to combine, I can only enforce these provisions
over my own code.
I see that, for tivoization, the end result is very much the same as
an all-GPL, although the tivoizer still has the option of removing the
GPLv3 code and hoping GPLv2's implicit anti-tivoization provisions are
not enforced. This would be just undoing the additional cooperation
that this additional permission would have provided.
However, for other GPLv3 defenses, it would make a difference. For
example, on the patent licenses that are implicit in GPLv2 and
explicit in GPLv3.
> and for people who don't like one or the other of the two licenses
> this will not be acceptable becouse it would allow someone else to
> take their work, modify it a bit, and release the result only under
> the license that they don't like
Which is precisely why I suggested this approach of permission to
combine, rather than as dual licensing. Because then nobody could do
what you say.
> one of the big problems that people don't realize is that if it takes
> GPLv3+ exception to be compatible with the apache license
For the record, it doesn't, GPLv3 is going to be compatible with the
apache 2.0 license, no additional exceptions needed.
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-21 20:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-21 9:39 how about mutual compatibility between Linux's GPLv2 and GPLv3? Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-21 11:35 ` jimmy bahuleyan
2007-06-21 17:53 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-21 18:00 ` david
2007-06-21 20:02 ` Alexandre Oliva [this message]
2007-06-21 21:13 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-21 23:37 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 0:31 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-22 1:00 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 1:34 ` Al Viro
2007-06-22 4:19 ` Theodore Tso
2007-06-22 6:00 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 14:43 ` Theodore Tso
2007-06-25 13:28 ` Lennart Sorensen
2007-06-25 19:54 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-26 4:10 ` Jan Harkes
2007-06-26 6:33 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-26 7:47 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-26 16:25 ` Jan Harkes
2007-06-27 23:08 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-27 23:53 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-28 0:56 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-28 1:37 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-28 2:37 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-28 2:51 ` Daniel Hazelton
2007-06-28 4:45 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-28 4:52 ` Daniel Hazelton
2007-06-28 6:15 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-28 17:40 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-28 19:13 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-30 2:53 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-30 4:04 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-30 6:16 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-28 3:44 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-28 4:57 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-28 5:08 ` Jan Harkes
2007-06-28 6:58 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-28 17:52 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-07-01 8:48 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 9:14 ` Alan Cox
2007-06-22 14:47 ` Theodore Tso
2007-06-22 19:14 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 4:26 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 5:23 ` Al Viro
2007-06-22 6:15 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 9:05 ` Alan Cox
2007-06-22 21:28 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-21 20:44 ` Jesper Juhl
2007-06-21 23:08 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-21 23:20 ` Jesper Juhl
2007-06-22 0:13 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-21 18:00 ` Al Viro
2007-06-21 20:15 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-21 23:04 ` Al Viro
2007-06-22 0:47 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-21 18:29 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-21 19:56 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-21 20:48 ` David Schwartz
2007-06-21 23:23 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 0:58 ` Jan Harkes
2007-06-22 4:14 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 4:59 ` Jan Harkes
2007-06-22 1:33 ` Bron Gondwana
2007-06-22 4:40 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 1:18 ` Bron Gondwana
2007-06-22 4:34 ` Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-22 5:25 ` Al Viro
2007-06-22 5:31 ` Randy Dunlap
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=orlkedjcsz.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br \
--to=aoliva@redhat.com \
--cc=david@lang.hm \
--cc=knight.camelot@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).