|From:||Sam Leffler <sam-zZXckVAlHaQAvxtiuMwx3w-AT-public.gmane.org>|
|To:||Adrian Bunk <bunk-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A-AT-public.gmane.org>|
|Subject:||Re: Fwd: That whole "Linux stealing our code" thing|
|Date:||Sat, 01 Sep 2007 15:03:36 -0700|
|Cc:||linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA-AT-public.gmane.org, linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA-AT-public.gmane.org, netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA-AT-public.gmane.org|
Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 01:37:18PM -0400, Constantine A. Murenin wrote: > >> On 01/09/07, Jeff Garzik <jeff-o2qLIJkoznsdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote: >> >>> Constantine A. Murenin wrote: >>> >>>> This will hopefully help diminish certain myths about the code licensing. >>>> >>> What myth? The myth that Theo understands dual licensing? >>> >> Reyk's code was never dual licensed, so it's not like it even matters >> to the original dispute. >> > > It's no longer dual licenced in the FreeBSD tree because the FreeBSD > people removed the GPL choice of the dual licenced code 3 months ago. > > So all of Theo's accusations of people breaking the law by making this > dual licenced code GPL-only apply as well to the FreeBSD people... > Sigh, why actually check the facts when you can make them up. The code in question is my code. It has my copyright (modulo bits shared with onoe-san who was consulted on the switch from dual-bsd/gpl to bsd only in freebsd). Of course what was amusing was how after I changed the license on the current code in freebsd certain folks retroactively applied the license changes to code that was 3 years old. But is there a point to all this nonsense? I dual-licensed the code so folks could adopt and use it however they saw fit. As I've said before I don't care what people do with the work I give away so long as they don't claim it's their own. > >> That said, I don't see what exact wording you consider inaccurate. >> > > Both the FreeBSD and Linux people draw the logical conclusion that this > "Alternatively" means everyone can always choose to remove one of the > two choices alternatively offered. > > According to Theo, that is "breaking the law"... > > I've yet to see "FreeBSD people" speak up so again you're just spouting jibberish. I am speaking up as the author of the code that set the dual license in place. I have the definitive say and I have said that any of my code that is dual-licensed can be made gpl only. Sam
Copyright © 2007, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds