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

Bug#754441: GMastermind Relicensing



Hi Riccardo,

I'm glad that you're fine with releasing your contributions under GPL-2+.

I'll send your arguments to debian-legal, and we'll see what they make
of them; you might be right.

Riley

On 24/07/14 07:49, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> Hi Riley,
> 
> the program comes with a "COPYING" file, which standard to contain the
> license used. In thiscase, it contains the GPL v2 or later.
> 
> In other words:
> 1) the program headers contain reference to the GPL v2 or later
> 2) the COPYING file distirbuted with GMastermind contains the GPL v2 or
> later text
> 3) only the readme file contains a reference to the program being
> distributed "GPL v2" without the "or later" clause
> 
> To me it is clear that the intent is the program to be under GPLv2 or
> later and that the readme.txt contains a small omission. The source
> files and the COPYING file have priority!
> 
> Given this, I already consider all my contributions under  the "GPL v2
> or later" clause.
> 
> Riccardo
> 
> On 2014-07-22 09:26:48 +0200 Riley Baird
> <BM-2cVqnDuYbAU5do2DfJTrN7ZbAJ246S4Xix@bitmessage.ch> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Riccardo,
>>
>> Even if you're not the original author, if you've made any modifications
>> to the work, you own copyright on them.
>>
>> For example, Linus Torvalds is not the only copyright holder of Linux;
>> the other ~5000 contributors all have copyright on it as well. This is
>> why the kernel can't be upgraded to GPL-3, even if Linus wants to.
>>
>> So, having a statement from you would be helpful. (You are only
>> relicensing *your* contributions)
>>
>> Also, what do you mean by "the COPYING is the full GPL v2 or later"?
>>
>> Riley
> 


Reply to: