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

From: Daniel Hazelton
Date: Fri Jun 15 2007 - 20:57:25 EST

On Friday 15 June 2007 19:39:57 Michael Gerdau wrote:
> > > > What matters is *my* intent in *choosing* the GPLv2, not *his*
> > > > intent in writing it.
> > >
> > > I beg to differ. By adopting _his_ license you adopted his view. [...]
> >
> > ianal, but fortunately that's not what the law is. The license says what
> > it says, and that is what controls. The intent of the author (of Linus
> > and other copyright holders) is a secondary source of information /if
> > and only if/ any ambiguity of meaning arises (as determined by a judge,
> > not by you or me). But the opinion and intent of RMS (unless adopted by
> > Linus) is quite immaterial.
> I agree with the "/if and only if/ any ambiguity of meaning arises" part.
> I'm sorry I didn't make that clear before.
> However if that situation arises (i.e. the judge decides there is an
> ambiguity) then as far as my experience tells me it is the intention of
> the author (RMS et al in this case) that counts. But I erred before...

I doubt this. In a situation like that the intent of the licensor is what
matter, not the intent of the original author of the license.


> Best wishes,
> Michael

Dialup is like pissing through a pipette. Slow and excruciatingly painful.
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