Re: Nuitka - GPLv3 plus contribution copyright assignment
By “ASF 2.0” I assume you mean “the Apache license version 2.0”. I will
use “Apache 2.0” which I gather is the more widely used name for that
Kay Hayen <email@example.com> writes:
> It is supposed to work like this: Everybody receives Nuitka from me
> under GPLv3. And "ASF2.0" for nothing. Then everything created on top
> of my work becomes GPLv3+ASF2.0 dual license.
You've been describing more complexities. Is it really just that you
want *every* receipient to receive license under the terms of “GPL 3.0
or Apache license 2.0, recipient's choice”?
> Then one day, I drop the GPLv3 and it's suddenly "ASF2.0" only.
Do you intend only some new version of the work to be under Apache 2.0
terms? That's the right of any copyright holder, though I think it's
rather odd and don't see what it gains you. The Apache license 2.0 is
not a copyleft, so any recipient can still bundle such a work with a
trivial work under the GPL 3.0 (or any other compatible license), and
they are then distributing your work under the GPL 3.0 again.
Do you intend to deny recipients the freedom to re-license under the
GPL? The Apache license 2.0 has been explicitly designed to *allow*
combination into GPL 3.0 works, so you appear to have chosen licenses
poorly if that's your intention.
Do you intend existing recipients who received a work under GPL 3.0 to
retroactively lose that license in the work? That's both underhanded and
ineffective, AFAIK. I don't think that's your intention, but I include
it for completeness.
As far as what this forum should be interested in:
If the work enters Debian licensed under GPL 3.0, that doesn't cause any
legal problems for Debian recipients (and that license can't be revoked
once granted unless the recipient violates the license).
If the work enters Debian licensed under Apache license 2.0, that
doesn't cause any legal problems for Debian recipients (and that
license, too, can't be revoked once granted unless the recipient
violates the license).
If you want to make some future version of the work and distribute under
a different grant of license, you're free to do so in works to which you
hold copyright, but must do so in compliance with the licenses you have
received in any contributions from other copyright holders. That's
getting outside the scope of this forum, and you should seek trained
legal advice if you need to be more sure about that.
\ “Two paradoxes are better than one; they may even suggest a |
`\ solution.” —Edward Teller |