Licensing/Structure

Mark Stone mstone at valinux.com
Wed Sep 6 09:37:11 PDT 2000


Wouldn't matter. Many companies have spent millions in software
development on the assumption that you can build on top of Linux in this
way. Linus has publicly supported this interpretation. There would be no
legal basis for an alternative interpretation under the circumstances.

Mark

On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Darren Young wrote:

> What happens if something happens to Linus???
> 
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Mark Stone wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Darren Young wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > Since the system as a whole is based on Linux perhaps it should be
> > > GPL. Are there any legal restraints when it comes to the GPL that require
> > > anyone that builds on top of Linux to GPL their portions?
> > > 
> > Short answer: No. The GPL doesn't work that way, or you couldn't have
> > Oracle for Linux, VMWare for Linux, Civ:Call to Power for Linux, etc.
> > 
> > Long answre: No. This actually falls into somewhat of a gray area in the
> > GPL (a license where gray areas abound), if you read the GPL very
> > narrowly. But Linus has publicly stated that he refuses to interpret the
> > GPL that narrowly when it comes to Linux, and he _is_ the final voice in
> > such matters.
> > 
> > 
> > Mark
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  Mark Stone                                            O | S | D | N
> >  mstone at valinux.com                  Open Source Development Network
> >  (408)542-5745                        Director of Developer Services
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 






More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list