Re: A possible GFDL compromise
paul cannon <pik@debian.org> a tapoté :
> On Thu, 28 Aug, 2003 at 06:43:48PM -0500, Rick Moen wrote:
> > "...or (at your [the recipient's] option) any later version." The fact
> > that "your" refers to the _recipient_ means that Scott's worst-case
> > scenario of FSF issuing a screwball GPLv3 is not a serious concern
> > _even_ for work whose licence grants include the quoted phrase.
>
> How about this scenario:
>
> 1- A hostile group gets control of the FSF (treachery, trickery,
> bribery, lawsuits, ...?)
>
> 2- They release a new version of the GPLv4, which states that "this
> software should be treated as released into the public domain"
>
> 3- All copyleft protection of items licensed with the "(at your option)
> any later version" phrase disappears.
>
> Sort of the "tentacles of evil" thought exercise. This is what I was
> always worried about when seeing that phrase. Sort of seems like a back
> door being reserved.
>
> Could this even happen?
As long as RMS live, it can't.
But the GNU licenses are anyway designated to reach a specific goal
very correctly documented on gnu.org. If some people were about to
change the licenses in the way you describe, they would be
discontinuing the GNU project and not be entitled to change the GNU
licenses.
The advantages of the "or any later version" is bigger than the
possibility of such a GPLv4, IMHO.
--
Mathieu Roy
Homepage:
http://yeupou.coleumes.org
Not a native english speaker:
http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english
Reply to: