> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 06:28:12PM +0300, Pavel Nikulin wrote: > Modification of GPL V2 terms are explicitly disallowed.
Greg KH replied at 03:29 (US/Eastern) on Friday: >> Again, we are not modifying the license, so all should be fine I agree with Greg; the Linux Kernel Enforcement Statement does not change the license of Linux as a whole, and it does not modify the GPLv2. Pavel Nikulin wrote at 11:28 (US/Eastern) on Thursday: > Greg, are you trying to put a new addendum to the terms of GPL v2? ... Pavel Nikulin wrote further at 15:16 (US/Eastern) today: > If you say that your lawyers have comprehensively researched that, > I can't say they did a good job. Almost every line sounds close to > being a contractual agreement. ... > And even this last phrase does not states explicitly that the nature of > the document as non-legally binding. ... > Moreover, you put "additional permissions under our license" wording > there, Certainly this issue is complicated. https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2017/oct/20/additional-permissions/ might help. I decided yesterday to write a blog post digging deep into the weeds on this, for those interested. -- Bradley M. Kuhn Distinguished Technologist of Software Freedom Conservancy ======================================================================== Become a Conservancy Supporter today: https://sfconservancy.org/supporter
