MX Linux Forum

https://hub.packtpub.com/linux-programm ... m-project/

Linux’s move from its Code of Conflicts to a new Code of Conduct has not been received well by many of its developers. Some have threatened to pull out their blocks of code important to the project to revolt against the change.

This could have serious consequences because Linux is one of the most important pieces of open source software in the world. If threats are put into action, large parts of the internet would be left vulnerable to exploits. Applications that use Linux would be like an incomplete Jenga stack that could collapse any minute.

https://lulz.com/linux-devs-threaten-ki ... ersy-1252/

Regarding those who are ejected from the Linux Kernel Community after this CoC:

Contributors can, at any time, rescind the license grant regarding their property via written notice to those whom they are rescinding the grant from (regarding their property (code)) .

The GPL version 2 lacks a no-rescission clause (the GPL version 3 has such a clause: to attempt furnish defendants with an estoppel defense, the Linux Kernel is licensed under version 2, however, as are the past contributions).

When the defendants ignore the rescission and continue using the plaintiff's code, the plaintiff can sue under the copyright statute.

...

The Linux kernel is licensed under GPL Version 2. Under normal circumstances what this license entails is that the code can be freely copied and distributed (and also that the code must be made available with binary distributions but thats not important here). The thing that becomes confusing is that whoever authored the code still owns the actual copyright for the code they contributed. Some projects under the GPL like Emacs have a smart policy where the maintainers will not accept your code unless you also turn over complete control of the copyright. Since you own the copyright and are merely licensing it under the GPL you can technically remove that license at any time.

The GPL Ver 3 has a clause that Ver 2 lacks which dictates though that you may not rescind your license over your code. In a court, a lawyer would make the argument that since the Free Software Foundation(the license’s publisher) saw the need to add the clause, that the Ver 2 allows for rescinding of the GPL license.

Mauser wrote: ↑Tue Oct 02, 2018 9:19 pm This is politics. I thought politics are not allowed on the forum.

Adrian wrote: ↑Tue Oct 02, 2018 9:24 pm

Mauser wrote: ↑Tue Oct 02, 2018 9:19 pm This is politics. I thought politics are not allowed on the forum.

I don't think discussing the kernel license is "politics" if it is then everything is.

Mauser wrote: ↑Tue Oct 02, 2018 10:08 pm O.K. I guess it's fair game then. I don't believe any of these articles about it until I see and hear what Linus Torvalds has to say about all this in a video. The way I see it is Microsoft pays these SJWs to do this to take down Linux. Microsoft's policy has always been, Embrace, Extend & Extinguish!