Re: Linux and GPLv2
M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> If, one might argue, the author wishes for the terms to remain those
> of the GPLv2, why does he not remove the "or any later version"
> option? The answer is simple. Such a license is not compatible with
> the standard GPL (with the "upgrade" option), since it has "further
> restrictions", compared to the version allowing a switch to a later
> version.
The GPLv2 does not have an upgrade option.
Authors may decide to offer a kind of dual license: one is GPLv2,
another is "any later version of the GPL as published by the FSF".
I really don't see how I am "imposing any further restrictions on
the rights granted by the GPLv2" by not offering a dual license
under a future GPLv3.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Reply to: