> Even the FSF doesn't think GPLv2 is the right license for linux? Yes, they want a stronger license---GPLv3. (Edit: I read your statement as "GPL is the righ

> Even the FSF doesn't think GPLv2 is the right license for linux? Yes, they want a stronger license---GPLv3. (Edit: I read your statement as "GPL is the right license"; I corrected my post.) > GPL'ing the kernel or not does not change that some people don't follow the rules. You can have them sign it in blood if you want. They'll just work around you or ignore you, as long as there is money to be made. Also, once you are big enough, cutting them off will just attract regulators. Your argument could extend to the entire free software movement---to all software written under the GPL. Your argument could be extended to _any_ license! It's dismissive of the impact of the free software movement and the successes of the GPL, and it's dismissive of the legal system as a whole.