Re: NEW ocaml licence proposal by upstream, will be part of the 3.08.1 release going into sarge.

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

Raul Miller <moth@debian.org> writes:

>> > I can see why you'd think that.  However, that's not one of the terms
>> > offered by GPL v2.  Perhaps there will be a GPL v3 which offers something
>> > analogous to "GPL v2 alone" as one of its terms.
>
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 11:32:58AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
>> Section 9 of the GPLv2 is quite clear: It says *if* the the program
>> specifies that any later version may be used, then you may elect to
>> use a later version.
>
> True.
>
>> It also says that *if* no version is specified,
>> you may use any version.
>
> True.
>
>> It does not say those are the only choices for software that uses the
>> GPL,
>
> This is true in the sense that the copyright holder might also offer
> the software under some other license.
>
>> so it does not prohibit specifying a particular GPL version to the
>> exclusion of others.
>
> False.  Section 6 says:

Er, section 6 isn't the copyleft in the GPL.  It's the "public
license" part.  It only grants rights to *the Program*, which is the
original work.  Look at the third line below.  The copyleft is in GPL 2.

>    Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
>    Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the
>    original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject
>    to these terms and conditions.  You may not impose any further
>    restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
>
> -- 
> Raul

-- 
Brian Sniffen                                       bts@alum.mit.edu