Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian

["Brian T.Sniffen" <bts@alum.mit.edu>]

mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård) writes:

> I have seen claims that attempts to restrict the choice to one
> particular version are invalid.  I can't remember the details right
> now.

Pure FUD.

> GPL section 9 contains this confusing paragraph:
>
>   Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the
>   Program specifies a version number of this License which applies to
>   it and "any later version", you have the option of following the
>   terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version
>   published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not
>   specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version
>   ever published by the Free Software Foundation.
>
> All that seems rather obvious to me, so why write it down?  Would
> there be another possible interpretation otherwise?  If that's the
> case, why not mention programs that allow only one specified version?

Because the default in the law -- for good and obvious reasons -- is
that the license is a single document written on paper.  Weird changes
to this, like references to one license from many works which call it
by name, require special care.  Exceptionally loopy changes, like
optional non-decreasing versioned licenses at the option of the
license*ee*, require extraordinary care.  You're looking at part of
that care.

-Brian

-- 
Brian T. Sniffen                                        bts@alum.mit.edu
                       http://www.evenmere.org/~bts/