Re: Linux and GPLv2

To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Linux and GPLv2
From: Daniel Carrera <dcarrera@math.umd.edu>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 08:42:53 -0500
Message-id: <[🔎] 20050313134253.GG23027@math.umd.edu>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20050313133741.GC42439@stack.nl>
References: <[🔎] 20050313123820.GA23027@math.umd.edu> <[🔎] 878y4r3d5x.fsf@kreon.lan.henning.makholm.net> <[🔎] 20050313133138.GE23027@math.umd.edu> <[🔎] 20050313133741.GC42439@stack.nl>

Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:

> Two recent articles on the topic are at

Yes, I've read those articles. But people here seem to imply something really 
bad going on with the GPLv3. Whereas those articles gave me the impression that 
it was promising.

> Areas of attention apparently include patents and signed code.

I don't know about signed code. I thought that addressing patents would be 
good. (disclaimer: I'm speaking from a position of ignorance)

Cheers,
-- 
Daniel Carrera          | I don't want it perfect,
Join OOoAuthors today!  | I want it Tuesday.
http://oooauthors.org   |

Reply to:

References:
- Linux and GPLv2
  - From: Daniel Carrera <dcarrera@math.umd.edu>
- Re: Linux and GPLv2
  - From: Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net>
- Re: Linux and GPLv2
  - From: Daniel Carrera <dcarrera@math.umd.edu>
- Re: Linux and GPLv2
  - From: Arnoud Engelfriet <galactus@stack.nl>

Prev by Date: Re: Linux and GPLv2
Next by Date: Re: Linux and GPLv2
Previous by thread: Re: Linux and GPLv2
Next by thread: Re: Linux and GPLv2
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread