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

Re: GPL 3 and derivatives



On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 06:15:17 +0530 Shriramana Sharma wrote:

> Francesco Poli wrote:
> >> Looking at the explanation: neutralising EUCD/DMCA-type laws is
> >> good, but using GPLv3 comes with the cost of endorsing things like
> >> the Affero GPL.
> > 
> > ... and despite its length, it does not even implement an actually
> > working copyleft mechanism.  :-(
> 
> Francesco, that's very surprising. Can you please elaborate, or have
> you  posted your opinion on this already in previous threads?

I'm primarily referring to the above mentioned compatibility with the
GNU AfferoGPL v3, and to the permission to add (a limited set of)
further requirements (see Section 7 of GPLv3).

Anyway, the thread about the final text of GPLv3 starts here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/06/msg00266.html
If you read it on the web archives, please remember that reference or
followup links do not cross month boundaries: hence you have to manually
search for followups in the following month:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/07/

> 
> > GPLv3 only just meets the DFSG, but has a broken copyleft and
> > annoying clauses.
> 
> It would really be helpful to have a well-structured document in the 
> wiki regarding the compliance of the GPLv3 to the DFSG. There were a
> lot  of comments on this list at the time of draft discussion of GPL
> and I  did not follow them and some of the comments from that time may
> not  apply now - to the final GPLv3 that is.

As I said, please take a look at the thread about the final text of
GPLv3.

I'm not aware of any official Debian analysis of GPLv3, but take into
account that there is already a significant amount of GPLv3'ed packages
in main and that /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-3 is already included in
the base-files package (since version 4.0.1).
I think this means the Debian Project is already showing, by practice,
that it considers the GNU GPL v3 as meeting the DFSG.

My *personal* opinion is that GPLv3 meets the DFSG (even though it's
very close to failing them), but should *not* be recommended to software
authors (copyright holders), since it has annoying clauses, a broken
copyleft, despite being long and complicated.

I cannot stress it more: this is my *personal* opinion.
IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP.


P.S.: Please follow the code of conduct, and send public replies to the
list only, since I haven't asked to be Cc:ed or To:ed.  Thanks.

-- 
 http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html
 Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through?
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpn8ZJUKrFDi.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: