[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: gplv3 files and updates

From: Karl Berry
Subject: Re: gplv3 files and updates
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 19:39:45 -0500

Yes, I know what gnulib-tool does.  It just doesn't seem legal to me.  I
don't buy the existence of an "inside group" with special knowledge as a
rationale for making changes in basic legalisms.  I hope Brett will

    always sign his paintings on the painting itself, rather than on a label
    next to it.

No, it's different.  As I wrote, you're explicitly changing/overriding a
license statement.  Not augmenting a file with an unstated license.  As
we all know, there are cases where it's not feasible to write a
copyright statement in the file itself (images, etc.).  That's not
what's happening here.

Unless your argument is that all these files are copyrighted by the FSF,
and we're acting on behalf of the FSF, and therefore we can downlicenses
from GPL to LGPL at will.  But if we can, it seems to me anyone can
(we're not FSF employees ...).

It all seems like a very dangerous precedent.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]