Linux Kernel and GPLv3

A quick follow up to this post. It looks like Linus has responded to the question of whether Linux will be released under the updated version of the GPL. The answer:
No. You think “v2 or later” is the default. It's not. The _default_ is to not allow conversion.
Conversion isn't going to happen.
Seems like s pretty definitive answer. I find two interesting things about the LKML thread. First, it seems Alan Cox doesn't necessarily agree with Linus on this and second, the thread starter is one Jeff V. Merkey – the same person who offered $50,000 for a BSD copy of the Linux kernel. You have to wonder what he's up to. One also has to wonder though, how close the final version of the GPLv3 will be to the currently released draft. Some of the new clauses do seem a bit restrictive, especially from a business perspective. It almost seems a bit too political. While I dislike DRM as much as the next person (actually, I'd guess I dislike it much more than the next person), I'm not yet convinced that a “Free Software” license is the place for that battle. It's a slippery slope. Where's the line? Will other items the FSF doesn't like creep into the next version? What happens when something the FSF doesn't like isn't something that people hate as much as DRM? Will the precedent already have been set? We'll have to wait for the final version is released to know what impact v3 will really have, but with it being incompatible with v2 (via it's additional restrictions) we could have quite a headache with some projects sticking with v2 and some going with v3.
–jeremy
GPL, GPLv3, FSF, Linus, Linux, DRM, Open Source