Re: FYI: Update to GPL notices
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:02:53AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> writes:
> > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 05:35:47PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >> As part of the XML conversion, I noticed the GPL notices on the three
> >> documents released under the GPL were the older form that had an FSF
> >> street address. I updated them to the current recommended form,
> >> including switching to all-caps for the warranty disclaimer in the
> >> recommended way (sometimes weird things matter for legal notices, so
> >> may as well not get creative).
>
> > Yes, indeed they do.
>
> > I was under the impression, though, that the address form is the
> > preferred form for version 2 of the license, whereas the website form is
> > the preferred one for version 3 of it.
>
> > I might be wrong, though.
>
> The address form is the recommended form in the text of the GPLv2, but I'm
> 95% sure that's only because the FSF haven't changed anything at all about
> the GPLv2 since the GPLv3 was released. Since the address information is
> effectively contact information for the FSF, I wouldn't think it would be
> license-specific; if they (and, more importantly, their lawyers) are now
> comfortable with a URL, I think it makes sense to just go ahead and follow
> the GPLv3 license notice form.
Sure.
My thinking always went something like, the GPLv3 has language that
allows a person redistributing the covered work to point to the source
on a network server (if they haven't made modifications), rather than to
have to offer it to anyone. In that light, it might make a difference
according to the license itself.
IANAL though, and I haven't actually ever read the GPLv3 in much detail.
I could be wrong.
> Keeping the address also runs the risk of the address becoming out of
> date, which has already happened once in the past. So this is a bit more
> future-proof.
There's that too, yes.
--
Help me, off-by-one kenobi. You're my only nought.
Reply to: