Re: [LAD] Attribution for Community Approval

On Saturday 29 January 2011 22:42:16 Arnold Krille wrote:
> 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"?

Stupid me, of course one can relicense it under "gpl3 only"... "gpl2 or later"
includes redistribution with "gplX or later" and "gplX only" with X>=2.

Off to bed,

Arnold

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