On Tue, 7 Mar 2000, Matthew Orgass wrote:

> On Tue, 7 Mar 2000, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> 
> > JD: make sure there's not a file somewhere else, say in that directory,
> > which expresses a copyright & license on those files. If there's not, then
> > you're free and clear.
> 
>   Actually, most Linux sources do not include a license, only a copyright,
> though a few do not even have a copyright.  However, at least in the
> United States it is no longer required that you place a copyright notice
> to obtain a copyright on your work.  

True...

>                                      Therefore, unless all authors listed
> give notice that it is in the public domain, it is under the GPL (since it
> is included in Linux, the authors clearly indend to allow it to be
> distributed under the GPL). 

Not necessarily. You're presuming the intentions of the authors. ;-) Also,
you're assuming the author of the code is the one who got it into the
Linux kernel.
 
>                             Some authors may be willing to also release
> it separately under a different license, but I would not assume that you
> could use any part of the Linux source except under the GPL.
> 
> In the top directory in the file README under "What is Linux" there is the
> paragraph:
>   It is distributed under the GNU General Public License - see the
>   accompanying COPYING file for more details. 
> 
> In COPYING:
>  [...]
>  Also note that the GPL below is copyrighted by the Free Software
>  Foundation, but the instance of code that it refers to (the Linux
>  kernel) is copyrighted by me and others who actually wrote it.
> 
>   In the file kernel/module.c there is the text:
> This source is covered by the GNU GPL, the same as all kernel sources.

This line, however, probably sinks it.