Novell could be banned from selling Linux

[fos]

Here's a Reuters article (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2007-02-02T230933Z_01_N02280856_RTRUKOC_0_US-NOVELL-LINUX.xml&WTmodLoc=TechNewsHome_C1_%5BFeed%5D-7) claiming that the Free Software Foundation may block Novell from selling Linux. "'The community of people wants to do anything they can to interfere with this deal and all deals like it. They have every reason to be deeply concerned that this is the beginning of a significant patent aggression by Microsoft,' Eben Moglen, the Foundation's general counsel, said on Friday." The article is probably talking about the potential addition of language to GPLv3 to prohibit deals like the one with Microsoft.

[danieldk]

http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6837365670.html

Still interesting though, to see what happens after March.

[bhobjj]

For a different perspective, look at Miguel de Icaza's blog from last November about Microsoft and Novell Collaboration:
http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2006/Nov-04.html

[krp]

What I find interesting in this saga are application packages and kernel modifications which are licensed under the GPL v2 or *newer* (later).

While the kernel may retain the GPL v2 license what will happen to the components of the kernel which have the v2 or newer (later) copyright attachment?

The same holds with application packages.

Concievably, Novell could possibly end up trying to sell a distrobution with a stripped down kernel and far fewer packages.

In my own not at all humble opinion it would serve the scurvy dogs right.

[Lavene]

While the kernel may retain the GPL v2 license what will happen to the components of the kernel which have the v2 or newer (later) copyright attachment?

I think that means that if you use that code in an application you are free to license it under any license you want from v2 and upwards.

Tina

[krp]

I think that means that if you use that code in an application you are free to license it under any license you want from v2 and upwards.

Tina

I remember reading that RMS stated those modules or application packages with the GPL v2 or later (newer) would automatically be upgraded to GPL v3.

I do not remember, sorry about that, where or when I read that particular story.

[jjmac]

I installed openSuSE10.2 yesterday, just to experiment with kde.

I found the way novel expressed the licencing section of the install, full of aggressive threats, quite off putting.

Seeing as how they are bundling with GPL code. Removing their logos/branding from any redistribution ... well, ok, i suppose ... but they put it across in such an aggressive way, it isn't hard to see just which team they are batting for.

The curious reference they make to 'there may be other licences' ... hmmm, their not even prepared to refer to the GPL by name.

I got the feeling that they were trying to say that the whole thing was really all their work/possession, but there may be some elements that have also been included. I tend to think of it as being very much the other way round really.


jm

[fos]

Suse continues to be popular. I guess the masses don't really care. The corporate types will probably embrace their policy.

As for me, I purged my library of anything related to Novell/Suse.

fos