Re: [LAD] Attribution for Community Approval

From: Arnold Krille <arnold@email-addr-hidden>
Date: Sat Jan 29 2011 - 23:42:16 EET

On Saturday 29 January 2011 21:52:06 Jeremy Salwen wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Arnold Krille <arnold@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> > Oh, changing the license without the permission from all
> > copyright-holders is
> > the same kind of crime and results in the same penalties. Regardless
> > whether
> > you switch from "gpl2 or any later" to "gpl3 only" or from "gpl2 or
> > later" to
> > "gpl3 or later" or even from "gpl2 or later" to "gpl2"...
> Actually, I'm pretty sure that the exact opposite is true. When you
> distribute "under the terms of the GPL2 or later", that means I can accept
> your program under the terms of the GPL3. The terms of the GPL3 say that I
> can modify it and redistribute it under the GPL3. Similarly for the GPL2.
> Notice the language says "*or* later", not "*and* later". I get to choose
> which license I agree to. Otherwise, it would be pointless to even offer
> it under the "GPL 2 or later" because I would *have* to distribute it
> under the GPL3, which places further restrictions on top of the GPL2,
> meaning that it would effectively be under the GPL3 no matter what.

You are right. Redistributing code from "gpl2 or any later" can happen under
gpl3 or any later. Now what about redistributing it under "gpl3 only"?

Anyway that is the reason I delete the "or any later" term in my copyright
notices. Apart from the fact that one can never know whether gpl4 will give
all the rights exclusively to microsoft or google or the nsa...

Have fun,

Arnold

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Received on Sun Jan 30 00:15:06 2011

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jan 30 2011 - 00:15:06 EET