Re: Would like to form a pool of Linux copyright holders for fasterGPL enforcement against Anthrax Kernels

From: luke.leighton
Date: Sun May 19 2013 - 06:57:36 EST

On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Ian Stirling <gplvio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 18.05.2013 19:27, luke.leighton wrote:
>> question: what is the procedure for having that licensing explicitly
>> added to the linux kernel sources?
> Fork the kernel, and put it up on a repo somewhere that says you're trying
> to get it all as
> GPL3.

pay me $100k per year to set up a foundation which maintains that
code and i will do so.

not going to happen, is it ian? i was initially quite pissed at the
rest of what you wrote, especially at its sarcasm. but then it
occurred to me that it is highly indicative of a feeling of
dis-empowerment that everyone feels in the linux kernel community.

you felt - ian - that what i want to do cannot be done by *anyone* -
presumably because Linus Has Spoken. or perhaps because the scale of
the task is beyond you.

but i'm not interested in any of that. i've made a decision. and my
question was very very specific.

i wish to know the procedure by which my formally and publicly
announced release of all linux kernel contributions under the dual
licenses of GPLv2 and GPLv3+ may be entered - formally - upstream and
into the linux kernel sources being maintained on

i don't give a fuck about what anybody else may choose; i do not give
a fuck about the timescales. i want *MY* choice to be respected: *MY*
code contributions under the GPLv2 and GPLv3+ and have that properly

so. could someone please inform me what the procedure is: is it as
simple as submitting a patch?

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