On Wed, 30 May 2001, Ken Ambrose wrote:
> Furthermore, this isn't something we Linux folk are immune to; people have
> changed their licenses before, though usually not in as ugly a fashion.
This occurred to me, too. And raised a couple of specific questions for me.
I am not a lawyer, and I realize most (possibly all) people on the list are
not, but perhaps others can comment in a non-binding fashion.
First, if someone donates code to the Linux kernel (e.g., they send a long
patch to the LKML [1]), do they implicitly grant license for that work under
the GPL [2]?
Second, does the GPL protect against license revocation? A quick re-reading
of it seemed to indicate to me that this was not specified. If I release
SuperWidget under the GPL, what is to stop me from later saying I revoke my
license and all your rights to use/modify/redistribute the code?
Footnotes
---------
[1] LKML = Linux Kernel Mailing List. http://vger.kernel.org
[2] GPL = GNU's General Public License. http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/gpl.html
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not |
| necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or |
| organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. |
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
