Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 8th Jan 2008 23:18 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 295007
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Misleading story title
by flanque on Wed 9th Jan 2008 01:55
in reply to "RE: Misleading story title"
RE[3]: Misleading story title
by merkoth on Wed 9th Jan 2008 02:05
in reply to "RE[2]: Misleading story title"
I thought some people who contributed to the kernel have passed away and so without re-writing those components it'd be impossible to get all the necessary permissions..
At least that's what I read.
At least that's what I read.
Wow, never came to think about it. What happens to copyrights when the owner passes away? I'm a programmer, not a lawyer, would anyone like to enlighten me?







Member since:
2006-03-20
While he does not control the kernel, his decisions hold weight in what happens to the kernel. If Linus wanted to go with the GPLv3, then it was more likely to happen. It would take someone like Linus to get permission from the other kernel developers to change the license of their code. Linus's decision makes it very unlikely that we will see the kernel being put under the GPLv3.
This does not prevent kernel developers from dual licensing their code as I understand it.