Re: Corrected version Re: pragma License ?

[Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>]

Harald Korneliussen <vintermann@gmail.com> writes:
> anon wrote:
>> Also Linux was first written under Linus own license then moved to
>> GPL because it did not allow commercial redistribution. So Linus could
>> go back and write a new Linux license.
>>
>> E N O U G H   S A I D   A B O U T   T H I S ! ! !
>
> Sorry, can't let blatant misinformation like that stand. It concerns
> Ada insofar GNAT & GPL is so widespread and important.
>
> By now, Linus alone does not hold copyright to the entire kernel. I
> believe some contributors assign their rights to him, but some keep
> it, and many assign it to the Free Software Foundation instead (there
> are many kernel contributors to the "left" of Linus on free software
> issues). The FSF would never agree to a license change, except to
> GPL3. GPL2 does not force you to upgrade to GPL3 but it permits it
> ("at your option, any later version"). This means anyone is free to
> ship the entire kernel under GPL3, although you could still get it
> under the old licence from Linus and others.

Linux is licensed under GPL v2 only, NOT "any later version".  That's
actually the crux of why a move to GPLv3 would require agreement from
all copyright holders.

> However, if a party redistributes or modifies a GPL3-version of the
> source, rather than a GPL2-version, perhaps by accident, they will be
> in trouble, if you think that limited opportunity to sue your users
> for software patent infringement is trouble.

They will be in trouble for violating copyright law, too.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.