Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 10:09:59 +0300 From: Anatoly Vorobey <mellon@pobox.com> To: David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RE: Why are people against GNU? WAS Re: 5.0 already? Message-ID: <20000515100959.57288@techunix.technion.ac.il> In-Reply-To: <001801bfbe09$ced4d120$021d85d1@youwant.to>; from David Schwartz on Sun, May 14, 2000 at 06:06:32PM -0700 References: <20000514093934.10200@techunix.technion.ac.il> <001801bfbe09$ced4d120$021d85d1@youwant.to>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
You, David Schwartz, were spotted writing this on Sun, May 14, 2000 at 06:06:32PM -0700:
>
> > It is the choice of the author to use the words "GPL version 2 (or any
> > later version) applies to this software" or "GPL version 2, and solely
> > that version, applies to this software", or nothing (which implies the
> > earlier choice). The author has the choice.
> >
> > Anatoly Vorobey,
>
> Do you have Stallman's permission to make and use a derived work from the
> GPL? The GPL is copyrighted after all.
I think you didn't understand what I was saying. You don't have to modify
the GPL in order to prevent later versions of it from applying to your
product. You need to *preface* the GPL with the statement that your
product is covered by this specific license that follows and no other
versions of it. The text inside GPL which allows a user to apply a later
version will only work if you did *not* preface the GPL by such a statement
(or if you prefaced it by explicitly saying that later versions will apply).
So, for instance, look at the COPYING file of mutt:
This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
Now if you were to specify explicitly that only the version 2 applies,
a user could not use a later version. If you didn't specify anything,
the user *could* usera later version by the power of the default clause
in the GPL.
> You don't think Stallman would give
> up the incredible power he has -- he can change the licensing terms of every
> single piece of software covered by the GPL at his whim. Not even the
> individual authors can do as the GPL reserves the right only for him.
That is also completely incorrect. An individual author *always* has
the right to reissue his product with any other license he chooses --
proprietary, free, whatever. The GPL's restrictions don't apply to the
copyright holder. This has been used extensively in fact (by the author
of the GPLed Ghostscript, for instance, who issues commercial licenses
for early versions with new technology).
--
Anatoly Vorobey,
mellon@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~mellon/
"Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly" - G.K.Chesterton
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000515100959.57288>