Linux Kernel Developers' Position on GPLv3

diegocgteleline.es writes "A group of 29 Linux kernel developers have recently come together and produced a position statement on GPLv3 (PDF, txt) explaining why, essentially, they don't like it. 'The three key objections noted in section 5 are individually and collectively sufficient reason for us to reject the current license proposal ... we foresee the release of GPLv3 portends the Balkanization of the entire Open Source Universe upon which we rely'. They've also run a GPLv3 poll."

Comments

Huh?

[Kjella]

Notable names not on the list

Yes, they are:

Name Vote
Linus Torvalds -2.5
Alan Cox -2.0

To summarise

[jb.hl.com]

In case you don't want to read the whole text, they think that GPLv3 is bad because:

• The FSF has an implicit trust from developers, users and distributors.
• The use of GPLv3 as a tool against DRM co-opts the work of thousands of people for the FSF's political ends, which they consider a violation of said trust (they do consider DRM a bad thing, they just don't want to be pulled into the FSF's war against it).
• The additional restrictions clause will be a licensing headache for distributors and may cause splintering among the community depending on what restrictions are included.
• The patents clause would make corporations even hosting GPLv3 programs on their website untenable, and might stop needed financial and programming contributions from the corporate world.
• Those three reasons even individually are reason enough to reject GPLv3, and if those clauses are taken out of GPLv3 then it's only a marginal improvement over v2 which simply isn't worth the headache. They also feel that because the FSF will be converting all of its projects over to v3, this will lead to Balkanisation inside the FLOSS community.