Theo de Raadt and Bill Gates don't much care for GPLv3 either. Right, and so like Linus and the Linux kernel, that's why they don't ship code under the GPLv

Theo de Raadt and Bill Gates don't much care for GPLv3 either. Right, and so like Linus and the Linux kernel, that's why they don't ship code under the GPLv3. I'm sure Linus does have GPLv3 running on his machine. He doesn't mind using the license, as it doesn't constrain him as a user in any way that he objects to. But he doesn't ship his own software under that license. I wasn't saying anything about the relevance of his opinion, to anything other than the kernel license himself. You had asserted that the kernel hadn't moved to the GPLv3 because of lack of copyright assignment; and I was just pointing out that in addition to that, the lead developer of the kernel personally dislikes the GPLv3, so even if he had the ability to change license, he probably would not have. Personally, I'm pretty happy with the GPLv3. I wish more developers would release code under it, instead of more liberal licenses, to help defeat things that I find unpleasant like Tivoization and software patents. But not everyone shares my opinion, and Linus's opinion carries a lot more weight than mine as the leader of the kernel project.