[clue-talk] Microsoft Patches Linux; Linus Responds

[Dennis J Perkins]

On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 20:34 -0400, Roy wrote:
> just a bit too quiet today ...
> 
> well, unless you've already seen this, it ought to be worth some "talk"
> http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7439/1.html
> _______________________________________________
> clue-talk mailing list
> clue-talk at cluedenver.org
> http://www.cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-talk

Well, contributing code would probably make it very hard, if not
impossible, to sue the Linux community over.  Even if it used a
Microsoft patent (I've heard concerns about this), I'm not sure they
could win in court if they decided to sue later on.  After all, they
gave the code to the kernel people.  A court could very well interpret
that as consent to let the kernel use the patent.

Once GPLed, released code stays GPL-ed.  A developer could decide to
quit releasing their own code under the GPL and make it private from
that point on, but what is already out there is still GPL-ed.  

They didn't do it to be friendly.  They released the code as GPL because
it already contained GPL-ed code.  (Being honest about the reasons would
have been better in my opinion.)  The GPL doesn't permit mixing
licenses, so the alternative would probably have been to recover all
copies of the code, and that is probably impossible.

I have read someone suggesting that releasing the code might harm a
competitor, such as VMWare, but I am not sure how.  It might hurt VMWare
but it doesn't benefit Microsoft if someone chooses Linux instead of
VMWare.  Unless it destroys some standard VMWare might be advocating?