[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: LGPL or GPL+"plugins welcome" ?

From: Stefaan A Eeckels
Subject: Re: LGPL or GPL+"plugins welcome" ?
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 07:22:56 +0200

On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 22:11:24 +0200
Alexander Terekhov <> wrote:

> The kernel is licensed under the GPL without any exceptions.

Actually, not quite (though they're more clarifications than 
real exceptions). The file "COPYING" at the top of the 2.4.18 kernel
source tree says:

|   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".
| Also note that the GPL below is copyrighted by the Free Software
| Foundation, but the instance of code that it refers to (the Linux
| kernel) is copyrighted by me and others who actually wrote it.
| Also note that the only valid version of the GPL as far as the kernel
| is concerned is _this_ particular version of the license (ie v2, not
| v2.2 or v3.x or whatever), unless explicitly otherwise stated.
|                       Linus Torvalds
|                   GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
|                      Version 2, June 1991
| Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
|                       59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307
|                        USA
| Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
| of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.

Now this should be interesting to those engaged in
copyright pettyfoggery, as Linus clearly violated the
copyright notice on the GPL when he added his note. 

Take care,

"What is stated clearly conceives easily."  -- Inspired sales droid

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]