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

From: Ian Stirling
Date: Mon May 20 2013 - 06:30:15 EST

On 19.05.2013 11:57, luke.leighton wrote:
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

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

Umm - that was my point - though I did not make it explicitly.

Either there is a policy change, and it is decided to allow such
dual-licenced code in the repo, or your code does not get checked in,
as it does not have a compatible licence.

If Linus takes the view that he does not wish to allow this - and the
project is not forked - you actually have to do the above.

Sure - you have the right to licence code you write any way you choose.
Linus (and the people involved in maintaining the kernel) have the right
to not accept your code under that licence.

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