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

Re: GPLv3 affero-compatibility (Re: Affero General Public License)

On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 11:14:00AM -0800, Mark Rafn wrote:
> It occurs to me that one of the biggest mistakes with the GFDL is the 
> confusion caused by clauses that do not apply in many cases.  Licenses 
> that have options and conditionals are EXTREMELY confusing, and lead to 
> hassle on the part of distributors (and Debian specifically) having to 
> evaluate each package to see how it interacts with license options.

> Has anyone suggested to the FSF that GPLv3 be more than one license?  The 
> draft is arguably already two licenses masquerading as one, and it would 
> be FAR clearer if there were GPLv3-distribution and GPLv3-service as 
> separate licenses, which licensors could choose between.

You then have problems with any "derivative works must be made available
under the terms of this license" clause, which is essential to copyleft. 
The goal of these optional clauses in GPLv3 is to *expand* the
GPL-compatible creative commons; your suggestion would further fracture it.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: