gkrellm license change notificaition
a.badger at gmail.com
Mon Jul 23 16:59:10 UTC 2007
On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 17:00 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> As said in my previous post, one could argue that they were not distributable
> then in the first place because:
> 1) They are a derived work of gkrellm
> 2) gkrellm was licensed GPL v2 or (at your option) any later version
> 3) having a derived work of gkrellm that allows only gpl v2 would be placing an
> additional restriction on distributing, which is not allowed.
IANAL but I think this is fallacious. gkrellm is giving me a license to
use the software/code in any way that I see fit so long as I follow the
GPLv2 or *(at my option)* any later version. So I can accept the
gkrellm code under a GPLv2-only license and write my plugin with that
understanding. I could also accept the gkrellm code under GPLv3-only
and write my plugin to that.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the Fedora-maintainers