Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

From: Alan Cox
Date: Fri Jun 15 2007 - 19:12:53 EST

> And the preamble, not being part of the active portion of the license, has
> absolutely *ZERO* bearing. Just as it is not the *intent* of RMS, the FSF or

Wrong (again)

The pre-amble is incredibly important as is the intent of the license
creator and even more so of the author.

When trying to solve a dispute the process starts with the legal
equivalent of banging the two parties head together in the hope they see
sense. If that fails then the legal wording is considered in detail.
Where it is ambiguous the surrounding context is considered in order to
understand the probable intent of the case.

Finally the stated intent of the author is considered in defence (The
doctrine of estoppel), and at least in UK law whether their intent was
honest (The doctrine of clean hands)

Legal disputes almost always end up about the things that are not clear
(if they were clear one side would shut up and put up) so the preambles
and statements are terribly important when this occurs, along with the
context and history.

Thus for example the fact Linus has said he believes what Tivo does is ok
means he can no longer sue Tivo for doing it. They are relying on his

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