[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Linux kernel complete licence check, Q.12

Scripsit Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@dplanet.ch>

> Q.12:
> linux/fs/reiserfs/README:

> Source code files that contain the phrase "licensing governed by
> reiserfs/README" are "governed files" throughout this file.  Governed
> files are licensed under the GPL.  The portions of them owned by Hans
> Reiser, or authorized to be licensed by him, have been in the past,
> and likely will be in the future, licensed to other parties under
> other licenses.  If you add your code to governed files, and don't
> want it to be owned by Hans Reiser, put your copyright label on that
> code so the poor blight and his customers can keep things straight.

I think this is straight GPL, plus a request to put in copyright
notices when things change. However, documenting that one did changes
is already mandated by GPL #2.a, so the request does not imply any
substantial difference from straight GPL.

> All portions of governed files not labeled otherwise are owned by Hans
> Reiser, and by adding your code to it, widely distributing it to
> others or sending us a patch, and leaving the sentence in stating that
> licensing is governed by the statement in this file, you accept this.

Adding things to the files without due notice of the change is
*forbidden* by the GPL. Essentially this notice seems to say that you
get the *additional* right to do such additions if you transfer your
copyright to Hans Reiser. Formally that amounts to a dual-licensing
scheme which is fine by the DFSG as long as one of the alternatives
(i.e. GPL) is free.

> It will be a kindness if you identify whether Hans Reiser is allowed

Non-legal request. Can be ignored for license-screening purposes.

> Further licensing options are available for commercial and/or other
> interests directly from Hans Reiser: hans@reiser.to.

Also nonproblematic.

> Finally, nothing in this license shall be interpreted to allow you to
> fail to fairly credit me, or to remove my credits, without my
> permission, unless you are an end user not redistributing to others.

Clarification of license, agrees AFAIK with our usual reading of the
GPL. (In most jurisdictions known on debian-legal, an author *cannot*
validly waive his rights to fair credit except in particular and
limited cases, so this clarification does not really change any legal

Henning Makholm                                                 "Fuck Lone."

Reply to: