Torvalds at odds with Cox over Linux and GPL3

Torvalds at odds with Cox over Linux and GPL3

Summary: Ingrid Marson of ZDNet News UK reports on Linux developer Alan Cox's take on GPL 3:Cox told ZDNet UK that he thinks that many of the changes in GPL 3 are sound: "The majority of it looks very sensible, such as letting copyright information be displayed in an About box rather than relying on command line instructions (as is the case in GPL 2). Some of the more contentious stuff has sensibly been made optional.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Open Source
4

Ingrid Marson of ZDNet News UK reports on Linux developer Alan Cox's take on GPL 3:

Cox told ZDNet UK that he thinks that many of the changes in GPL 3 are sound: "The majority of it looks very sensible, such as letting copyright information be displayed in an About box rather than relying on command line instructions (as is the case in GPL 2). Some of the more contentious stuff has sensibly been made optional."..... His viewpoint is in direct contradiction to that of Linus Torvalds, the founder of Linux, who said last week that he won't convert Linux to GPL 3, as he objects to its proposed digital rights management, or DRM, provisions.

Trouble in Linux paradise? Going back to the possibility that Sun might make OpenSolaris available under the GPL 3, now that I think about that, Sun COO/president Jonathan Schwartz's announcement of that possibility comes across as a very shrewd move (whether it was intended that way or not).  Imagine, for example, a world where OpenSolaris is available under the GPL 3 and Linux isn't. 

Topic: Open Source

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

4 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Not a problem

    "Trouble in Linux paradise?"

    This very question is suggesting that because Torvalds and Cox have a difference in opinion there is a big problem with Linux development.

    That's just plain silly. Sensible people, in the same organization, disagree all the time, including corporations.

    Torvalds is the "benevolent dictator" of Linux kernel development. But enough people and/or corporations (who have a vested interest in Linux development and licensing) say they want to go with GPL 3, then I'm sure Torvalds will listen.

    Besides, Torvalds' opinion is really more of a "wait and see" stance. He never said that he would never adopt GPL 3, he said that he is not adopting it at this time. That is actually a very sensible stance.

    No, there is no trouble in paradise.
    boobasaurus
    • Of course Torvalds can change his mind...

      ...but, from his own words, I think it's more than a possibility not to adopt GPL3: in that post he said: "Conversion isn't going to happen". Anyway, may Stallman can change his position too, why not? But, in my vision, this fork of ideas isn't too good for the OSS movement, since gives an idea of being little united (that's not the word I'm looking for, I just don't know it in English). It's obvious that divergence of oppinions happens all the time in Apple, MS, IBM, etc, but it normally doesn't show up to the public...
      Rikho
  • Cox right, Torvalds wrong

    Pretty simple! The GPL3 vs GPL2 comparison from the KERNEL viewpoint is a wash - there's no reason NOT to support GPL3.
    Roger Ramjet
    • One difficulty...

      Linus himself cannot unilaterally change the license under which the kernel is released, since he does not hold the copyright on the entire kernel -- each change is copyrighted by its submitter.

      In order to change the license for the kernel, a lot of time and effort will be required.
      rsteiner9