Ubuntu reaches out to embarrassed SuSE devs

[Les Mikesell]

On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 22:38 +0000, Ian Malone wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 2006-11-26 at 14:21, Ian Malone wrote:
> >>>>> That would be an interesting challenge.  Does the modification
> >>>>> that Linus added to the copyright have the same weight as
> >>>>> the GPL in applying to everything subsequently added?
> >>>>>
> >>>> ? The code is covered by GPL 2.
> >>> Beg your pardon, but the COPYING file included with the
> >>> last kernel source I saw (admittedly a 2.4.x...) was
> >>> not the same as a stock GPL 2 and points out that programs
> >>> that interface with kernel system calls are not
> >>> derived works.
> >>>
> >> Pardon granted ;)  If that's the licence you make
> >> and submit changes under then that's the one you're
> >> bound by.
> > 
> > No, he didn't modify the part of the GPL that says
> > the 'work as a whole' must be distributed under the
> > same terms.  To whatever extent the GPL is valid, it
> > has to apply to any modifications or they can't be
> > distributed.   The whole point of the GPL is that
> > people making changes have no choice about the license
> > terms that must be applied.
> > 
> 
> What are we disagreeing about?

I thought you were suggesting that people had a choice
of license terms when submitting changes.  The terms make
it very clear that they don't.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell at gmail.com