Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 29 Apr 2008 08:26:27 +0200 | From | "Hans J. Koch" <> | Subject | Re: [Q]Can a file be dual licensed in upstream kernel? |
| |
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:40:26AM +0530, pradeep singh rautela wrote: > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:07:37AM +0530, pradeep [snip] > > > Can a module/file be Dual licensed(i.e BSD/GPLv2) in the upstream > > > Linux kernel sources? > > > > Are you somehow not believing the files that we have in the tree that > > are licensed this way? > > > I think it is GPLv2 only. > > > > Licensing questions would be better off asked to lawyers, not > > programmers. Would you ask a random group of lawyers on a public > > mailing list medical questions and trust their responses? > > Um... apologies Greg.I did not mean that in any sense.I am a > programmer not a lawyer. I am asking to get clear understanding of the > licensing issues and I myself do not have any good understanding on > dual licensing Vs GPLv2 licensing in Linux kernel.
I share Greg's opinion that this list is not the place for getting or giving legal advice. Please _do_ consult a lawyer. In my _personal_opinion_, dual licensing gives you the right to choose between two licenses. If a file is dual licensed BSD/GPLv2, anybody (including yourself) is free to get rid of the BSD part and make it GPLv2 only.
Thanks, Hans
| |