[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-kernel
Subject:    Re: FreeGPL license proposal (was Re: Linus Speaks About KDE-Bashing)
From:       alan () lxorguk ! ukuu ! org ! uk (Alan Cox)
Date:       1998-07-15 19:31:56
[Download RAW message or body]

> Why not consider making the Mozilla Public License the basis for the 
> new FreeGPL license? The one thing about the Mozilla Public License 
> is that it has been extensively reviewed and hashed out by both 
> Netscapes laywers and developers in the Open Source Community to the 
> point of agreement.

FreeGPL is a very poor and misleading name for any new license. I thin
the MPL has its place however 

> The one biggest plus is that this license is now well known, and I 
> think it is highly beneficial to the Open Source Community for as 
> much code as possible to fall under the same license. I think this is 

Licenses - each has its place but not too many . Couldnt agree more

> understand all the legal ramifications of the license. In fact IMHO 
> if you interpret the GPL/LGPL's anti-commerical sentiments it would 
> appear to me that much of the commercial software appearing for Linux 
> does violate some of the GPL licensing (but this is argueable because 
> the damn license is so vague!).

The C libraries are LGPL so that appears to be a non issue. The kernel
itself is GPL and because of license interpretation issues the kernel 
has the following in the README, to clarify it.

-----------

   NOTE! This copyright does *not* cover user programs that use kernel
 services by normal system calls - this is merely considered normal use
 of the kernel, and does *not* fall under the heading of "derived work".

-----------


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]