Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751203AbWI2Cpy (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 22:45:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751324AbWI2Cpx (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 22:45:53 -0400 Received: from mx1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:28814 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751203AbWI2Cpw (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 22:45:52 -0400 From: Neil Brown To: davids@webmaster.com Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 12:45:40 +1000 Message-ID: <17692.35028.84683.896718@cse.unsw.edu.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" Subject: RE: GPLv3 Position Statement In-Reply-To: message from David Schwartz on Thursday September 28 References: <20060928144028.GA21814@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.4.1 X-face: [Gw_3E*Gng}4rRrKRYotwlE?.2|**#s9D > > In my very uninformed opinion, your problem is a very minor one. Your > > "v2 or later" code won't get the license v2 removed, it will become > > dual "v2 or v3" licensed. And assuming that v3 only adds restrictions > > and doesn't allow the licensee any additional rights, you, as the > > author, shouldn't have to worry much. > > > > The problem arises later. As with BSD/GPL dual licensed code, where > > anyone can take the code and relicense it as either BSD or GPL, "v2 or > > v3" code can get relicensed as v3 only. At this point, nothing is > > lost, as the identical "v2 or v3" code still exists. But with further > > development on the "v3 only" branch, you have a fork. And one that > > doesn't just require technical means to get merged back, but has legal > > restrictions. > > Unless I'm missing something, you *cannot* change the license from "v2 or > later at your option" to "v3 or later". Both GPLv2 and GPLv3 explicitly > prohibit modifying license notices. (Did the FSF goof big time? It's not too > late to change the draft.) Could you point to the test in either license that prohibits modifying license notices? I certainly couldn't find it in section 2 of GPLv2, which seems to be the relevant section. Interestingly, 2.b seem to say that if I received a program under GPLv2, and I pass it on, then I must pass it on under GPLv2-only... So to be able to distribute something written today under GPLv3 (when it comes into existence), you must be the original or have received it directly from the original author.... NeilBrown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/