Re: Corrected version Re: pragma License ?

[anon@anon.org (anon)]

I started this by my comment that I think Linus will write a new License 
for Linux if GPL version 3 is adopted.  That cause Dirk call me a lier and 
I tried to correct him. I think he is a trouble maker.  The problem is that 
some can not read a comment and will not let it stand they want to fight. I 
few sad for them!

Other than my comment every thing I said can be found on a number of 
web sites around the world ( google search).  And until Linus created 
Linux version 0.12 all previous version were under License written by 
Linus. That means Linux version 0.11 was not under GPL version 1 or 
2.  All code was donated to Linux.  And if Linus does not use GPL 
version 3 he will have to adopt another or write a new license.  

Also the US legal system will not all two version of the GPL.  Contract 
law stated that once the new version has be adopted the previous version 
is no longer enforceable. An example is a will, update a will then the old 
version is no longer valid. Because this is federal law it does not need to 
be included in the license itself.

As for contributors, some want the GPL version 3, some do not.  We will 
have to see what happens. But most will go along with what ever Linus 
decides to do, because most want Linux to continue to LIVE.

As for GNAT Ada. Well at the movment there are 3 version.  The top of 
the line is the Gnat Pro, which is under the Adacore license, and it is 
not GPL.  Then the Adacore GPL version which is at the movement 
is under GPL 2. Unsure what Adacore is going to do about the GPL 
version if the GPL version 3 is adopted.  We will just have to wait and 
see.  And the third version is GNU Ada which is under the GPL version 2 
for now.  If version 3 is adopted the GNU Ada will be updated to license 
GPL version 3. The only different will be that Adacore will be replace as 
the main maintainer if Adacore decides to do not to update the GPL Ada 
to version 3.


E N O U G H   S A I D   A B O U T   T H I S ! ! !
L E T   T H I S   D I E ! ! !


In <1182493841.177772.314860@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,  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.
>
>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.
>