Re: GPLv2 or not GPLv2? (no license bashing)

From: vda
Date: Tue Mar 09 2004 - 04:57:49 EST

On Tuesday 09 March 2004 11:04, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> vda <vda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > Well, Linux kernel is GPLed. If one adds his/hers code to the kernel
> > (s)he is automatically agrees to the terms of GPL.
> >
> > Because "adds code" is actually incorrect here. "modifies existing
> > GPLed code" is more accurate.
> Suppose I write a new kernel module, without touching any existing
> code, and this module gets included in the kernel tree. Have I added
> code? Yes. Have I modified GPLed code? I think not.

I believe Linus said so too wrt out-of-tree modules.

I think modules included in 'official' tree better be GPLed
or else phrase 'Linux kernel is GPLed' becomes meaningless.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at