> On 6/10/07, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 04:25:55PM +0530, debian developer wrote:
> > > On 6/10/07,
david@lang.hm <david@lang.hm> wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 10 Jun 2007, Tarkan Erimer wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >> > And maybe another questions should be : How long a copyright
> > owner
> > > > can
> > > > >> > hold the copyright, if died or lost for sometime ? if died, the
> > > > >> > copyright still should be valid or not ? If lost, what the law
> > orders
> > > > at
> > > > >> > this point for copyright holding ?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I believe that in the US it's life + 90 years.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> David Lang
> > > > > Hmm... Really,it is damn too much time to wait! It's really better
> > idea
> > > > to
> > > > > replace the code of this person as said before instead of waiting
> > such
> > > > 90+
> > > > > years!
> > > >
> > > > exactly, however as others are pointing out, there are a lot of active
> > > > developers who do not agree with some of the key points of the GPLv3
> > > > (including Linus), so until you convince them that the GPLv3 is better
> > it
> > >
> > > Last heard, Linus was quite impressed with the toned down version of
> > > the final draft of GPLv3. I think Linus, and other major developers
> > > should make their stand on this issue clear so that the kernel
> > > community can discuss the future steps.
> >
> > "future steps"? Hah.
> >
> > My code is going to stay GPLv2 as the v3 license is horrible for kernel
> > code for all of the reasons I have said in the past, plus a few more
> > (what, I can make an "industrial" product but not a commercial one?
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> What exactly in GPLv3 forbids you from making a commercial product?
