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

Re: Final text of GPL v3

Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org> writes:

> Here's a thought experiment:
> Suppose I wrote some software, and wrote it to a CD, erasing all other
> copies. I then wrote out, in longhand, the text of the GPLv3 on paper,
> and attached it to the CD, and gave it to you. This software would
> clearly be under the GPLv3, and you could redistribute it under those
> terms.

No. This is no more true than to say that, because the GPL, BSD, and
Artistic licenses accompany software in Debian, that those licenses
apply to all of that software.

The only thing you've clearly done is distribute a license text and a
CD. The license text doesn't apply as the terms for the software on
the CD unless and until the copyright holder explicitly declares so in
a grant of license unabiguously on that particular software.

> > At the end of the day, the intentions of the licensor are
> > important, and if those intentions are made explicitly clear, it's
> > a bit difficult for the GPL to contradict them.
> But the GPL _is_ the intent of the licensor. You know this, because
> they start with "I license this code under the terms of the
> GPL(v3)..."

In that case, yes, I agree that the copyright holder has explicitly
chosen to renounce any additional restrictions beyond those in the
GPLv3 terms.

 \          "Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a |
  `\                                       feature."  -- Rich Kulawiec |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

Reply to: