Re: Copyright/licensing action plan + a sample [PATCH]

[Reinhold Kainhofer]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Am Dienstag, 22. September 2009 11:16:58 schrieb Anthony W. Youngman:
> In message <address@hidden>, Reinhold
> Kainhofer <address@hidden> writes
> 
> >Both are right: They don't agree to additional
> >FREEDOMS in the sense that the "user" is not free to choose GPLv2 or
> > GPLv3, but they also don't agree to additional
> > RESTRICTIONS: Using GPLv3 would add an additional restriction to the use
> >(DRM, atent claues) and this is prohibited by GPLv2only.
> >All users are be free to use GPLv2 applications in tivo-like machines and
> > that freedom is whatI'm talking about.
> 
> NO NO NO!
> 
> Firstly, the "user" is completely UNaffected by ANY version of the GPL -
> the GPL *E*X*plicitly says it DOES NOT apply to users.

Okay, once more bad choice of words on my side... I was talking about the 
users of the code (i.e. the developers)

> Secondly, if you are distributing code which a copyright owner has
> licenced v2/v3 then it is YOUR choice whether to distribute it under v2
> or v3. Where are the "extra restrictions"? 

Exactly. But lilypond is GPL v2only, not v2/v3...

> (That's why, actually, I believe that sticking a v2-only notice on code
> that the author licenced v2+ is a GPL violation - you are adding
> restrictions by denying the recipient the choice of licence.)

You might be denying the reciepient the choice of license. But that does not 
violate the GPL, since v2+ says: You can use it under the GPL v2, or at your 
choice any later option. If I'm using it under the GPL v3, I'm not bound by 
what the GPL v2 says and vice versa.
Also note that the GPL only says that you can't take away rights granted "by 
this license" (the choice between GPL v2 and v3 is NOT granted by the GPL!). 
It does not say that all rights that the author originally granted must be 
preserved...

> >Thus linking to a LGPLv3 library takes aways rights (e.g. to legally
> > prevent access by using DRM or to sue for patent infringement) that the
> > GPLv2 provided.
> 
> That's the nub of the whole damn thing :-( but if the library licence is
> "v2 or v3" then the problem goes away.

Yes, because then one can use it under the GPLv2.

Cheers,
Reinhold
- -- 
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinhold Kainhofer, address@hidden, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial & Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
 * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886
 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFKuPBLTqjEwhXvPN0RAgXCAKClfTVqRVfFiyAggDqv5+SMNtoHxQCeOTT7
jPybZWmv2FpFCp2IaxI7mnI=
=TfyB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----