Misunderstanding GPL's terms and conditions as restrictions
olivares14031 at yahoo.com
Mon Jul 28 01:53:33 UTC 2008
> >> IOW, the whole is under the terms and conditions
> of the GPL. The
> >> permissions (1-3, in GPLv2) apply to each and
> every part as a
> >> consequence of this.
> > Not _just_ the permissions. The exact terms of the
> license must
> > apply:
> Exactly. And the GPL *is* a set of permissions with
> nothing but it. Like any other Free Software license.
> > It says the 'terms of this License'. You
> can't have the terms of this
> > license without the terms of 2b also being applied.
> 2b is not a "terms" of the license, it is a
> condition for you to be
> entitled to modify and distribute the work, or modified
> versions of
> it, under the GPL. If you want to distribute it under
> license, and you have some additional permission to do so,
> it doesn't
> get in your way.
> >> Now, what does agreeing to this amount to?
> "You may breathe in, as
> >> long as you breathe out. Do you agree?"
> > If you agree to
> > "cause any work that you distribute or
> You don't have to agree to that. That's the point.
> That's where
> you're misreading it. Please talk to a lawyer you
Who can he trust, most of them sell themselves to protect others but your own interests :(
Here's a page about Harald Welte's blog, where one can find out about GPL violations
GPL Freedom has limits:
One of the problems with the GPL is that people can violate it and then when they see themselves corraled, they can say I will release the code and be clear. There are no consequences. This is also a reason why the users that choose licenses try to avoid the GPL. GPLv3 tries to correct some of the issues, but it has some things that many proponents of the GPL do not agree to :(
More information about the fedora-list