From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759291AbXFZWMo (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:12:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757581AbXFZWMg (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:12:36 -0400 Received: from mail1.webmaster.com ([216.152.64.169]:1755 "EHLO mail1.webmaster.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757224AbXFZWMf (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:12:35 -0400 From: "David Schwartz" To: Cc: "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" Subject: RE: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:12:06 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 In-Reply-To: <2e6659dd0706261216y4e0e96dp83091f712c836825@mail.gmail.com> X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:12:21 -0700 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:12:23 -0700 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > But thats YOURcompanyname.com. Not a third party. If you gave as a > link somebodyelsescompany.com/gpl then somebodyelse could get rid of > the link, and your offer wouldn't be valid for "at least three years" > > T You mean it might not be valid for at least three years. It also might be. You also might go out of business in less than three years. You're not violating the GPL simply because you might not be able to honor your offer in less than three years. You're violating the GPL when you in fact fail to honor it. I do agree that providing a link to a third party URL is risky, but I do not agree that it doesn't comply with the GPL. DS