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

Re: discussion with the FSF: GPLv3, GFDL, Nexenta

* Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com> [070608 21:00]:
> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 04:58:04PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > * Kevin Mark <kevin.mark@verizon.net> [070523 11:00]:
> > > Could someone make a page with GPLv2-only software, I'd be curious what
> > > would be affected. Maybe the easiest way would be to dump and format a
> > > page on the Wiki so that it could be commented upon?
> >
> > Given the current drafts for the GPLv3, I think GPLv2-only software
> > will not go away. At least if that "everyone is allowed to make this
> > non-free by combining with code under the Affero GPL, and you are not
> > allowed to make this copyleft by forbidding that", I'm stronly
> > considering making new software GPLv2 only in the future, too.
> I doubt they did this intentionally.  Can you ellaborate on it?  Which phrase
> in particular?  Did you send your concerns as comments to the latest draft?

I think this is intentional, given that the latest draft explicitly says:

|13. Use with the GNU Affero General Public License.
|Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have permission to
| link any covered work with a work licensed under version 3 (or any later
| version published by the Free Software Foundation) of the GNU Affero General
| Public License, and to convey the resulting combination.  The terms of this
| License will continue to apply to your covered work but will not apply to the
| work with which it is linked, which will remain governed by the GNU Affero
| General Public License.

And since the current version of that license restricts running, which I
consider the most elementary freedom. (What does availabity of source
help me, when I am not even allowed to run it as I want?), and later versions
might make all other kind of funny things, that simply is an anti-copyleft thing.

With anti-copyleft I mean a free license that forbids to make it copyleft by
forbidding to forbid to make it non-free. Other licenses trying this are
the "BSD protection license" and some other bad jokes...

	Bernhard R. Link

Reply to: