gkrellm license change notificaition

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at gmail.com
Mon Jul 23 17:44:30 UTC 2007

On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 19:21 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > 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.
> > 
> You can write your plugin no matter what, because the GPL is about 
> distributing, if you distribute your derived work, you must do so under the 
> conditions of the original work, and those conditions say that you may not 
> impose additional restrictions, taking away the receivers right to distribute 
> the received derived work under a later version of the GPL is a further 
> restriction.
s/write/distribute/ in what I wrote and it comes out the same.
GPLv2-or-later-at-my-option is giving me the choice of how to distribute
the code.  I think that language gives me the choice to distribute as
GPLv2 only, GPLv3 only, or GPLv2+.

In any case, I think this has reached a point where there's no use our
arguing over it.  Since we cannot agree as to what the meaning of the
license is, it's obviously not as clear as either of us think.  Only a
lawyer can judge what the true interpretation is likely to be.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070723/9200ebd8/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-maintainers mailing list