On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:15:25 +0000 John Halton wrote:
> On 15/11/2007, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
> wrote:
[usual unbacked assertions and handwaving by Mr. Schilling...]
>
> It is possible the licence uses the "version two or later" version of
> the GPL, which would allow the software to be distributed under GPL
> v.3, but I agree it looks more likely that the current version is
> under GPL v.2.
Wait, wait!
*If* the copyright holder of the work under question stated that it is
redistributable under the terms of the GNU GPL, without mentioning any
license version number[1], then Section 9 of GPLv2 kicks in[2]:
| If the Program does not specify a version number of
| this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free
| Software Foundation.
Hence such work would be distributable under the terms of any published
version of the GNU GPL (currently v1, v2, or v3, and in the future any
later version, as well).
[1] I haven't checked myself, but *if* this is the case...
[2] assuming the license text that accompanies the work is the GNU GPLv2
(GPLv3 has a nearly indentical clause anyway)
--
http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html
Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through?
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgptmKvIIZ8zH.pgp
Description: PGP signature