[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 22:35:11 +0000 "Ben Goodger" <goodgerster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/02/07, David Johnson <dj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > * IF significant parts of GNU/Linux get relicensed under GPLv3; > > Linux cannot realistically be relicensed. There are far too many people to > seek approval from, and many of them are dead. I'm not sure who holds the > copyrights to GNU, but presuming it's not entirely the FSF then GNU will not > be totally relicensed either. Most GNU packages do not need to be relicensed to move from GPL2 to GPL3 - it's only really the kernel team that removed the "at your choice any later version" declaration. In the majority of cases, certainly with GNU code, what is GPL2 now will be GPL3 without requiring the consent of any copyright holders. Changing from GPL2 to some-other-licence is, as you describe, nigh on impossible. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpQDDg5YNSRh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html