> By default all files without license information are under the default > license of the kernel, which is GPL version 2. Which is factually incorrect. They are under a licence that is at least as permissive as GPL v2. However they may be under a more permissive licence and as you are not the rightsholder you don't have the right to relicence them mroe restrictvely. For example I find a reference piece of code whose author says it is 'too trivial to copyright'. I (not the author0 place that code in the kernel. The licence on that code is still 'too trivial to copyright' (by estoppel). That's GPL 2 compliant but it is *NOT* GPL. As anyone can contribute third party code that is GPL compliant legitimately you can't assume any unmarked code is GPL, merely 'at least GPL'. Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
