Copyleft/guide
6
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Rewrote this sentence for tutorial context.

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Bradley M. Kuhn 2014-03-20 13:12:54 -04:00
parent df7c046d04
commit 10b0ade5d5
1 changed files with 24 additions and 20 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

44
gpl-lgpl.tex
View file

@ -1573,6 +1573,7 @@ say that this restriction is any way unreasonable is simply ludicrous.)
\medskip
\label{GPLv2s2-at-no-charge}
The next phrase of note in GPLv2~\S2(b) is ``licensed \ldots at no charge.''
This phrase confuses many. The sloppy reader points out this as ``a
contradiction in GPL'' because (in their confused view) that clause of GPLv2~\S2 says that redistributors cannot
@ -2736,32 +2737,35 @@ services for the support of that software.
\section{GPLv3~\S5: Modified Source}
\label{GPLv3s5}
% FIXME: 5(a) is slightly different in final version
GPLv3\S5 is the rewrite of GPLv2\S2, which was discussed in \S~\ref{GPLv2s2}
of this tutorial. This section discusses the changes found in GPLv3\S5
compared to GPLv2\S2.
Section 5 contains a number of changes relative to the corresponding section
in GPLv2. Subsection 5a slightly relaxes the requirements regarding notice of
changes to the program. In particular, the modified files themselves need no
longer be marked. This reduces administrative burdens for developers of
modified versions of GPL'd software.
GPLv3\S5(a) still requires modified versions be marked with ``relevant
date'', but no longer says ``the date of any change''. The best practice is
to include the date of the latest and/or most significant changes and who
made those. Of course, compared to its GPLv2\S2(a), GPLv3\S5(a) slightly
relaxes the requirements regarding notice of changes to the program. In
particular, the modified files themselves need no longer be marked. This
reduces administrative burdens for developers of modified versions of GPL'd
software.
Under subsection 5a, as in the corresponding provision of GPLv2, the notices
must state ``the date of any change,'' which we interpret to mean the date of
one or more of the licensee's changes. The best practice would be to include
the date of the latest change. However, in order to avoid requiring revision
of programs distributed under ``GPL version 2 or later,'' we have retained
the existing wording.
% FIXME: It's now (b) and (c). Also, ``validity'' of proprietary
% relicensing? Give me a break. I'll fix that.
Subsection 5b is the central copyleft provision of the license. It now
states that the GPL applies to the whole of the work. The license must be
unmodified, except as permitted by section 7, which allows GPL'd code to be
combined with parts covered by certain other kinds of free software licensing
terms. Another change in subsection 5b is the removal of the words ``at no
charge,'' which was often misinterpreted by commentators. The last sentence
of subsection 5b explicitly recognizes the validity of disjunctive
dual-licensing.
GPLv3\S5(c) is the primary source-code-related copyleft provision of GPL (The
object-code-related copyleft provisions are in GPLv3\S6, discussed in
\S~\ref{GPLv3s6} of this tutorial). Compared to GPLv2\S2(b), GPLv3\S5(c)
states that the GPL applies to the whole of the work. Such was stated
already in GPLv2\S2(b), in ``in whole or in part'', but this simplified
wording makes it clear the entire covered work
GPLv3\S5(c) notes that the license text itself must be unmodified (except as
permitted by GPLv3\S7.. Another change in GPLv3\S5(c) is the removal of the
words ``at no charge,'' which was often is misunderstood upon na\"{i}ve
reading of in GPLv2\S(b) (as discussed in \S~\ref{GPLv2s2-at-no-charge} of this
tutorial).
% FIXME: 5d. Related to Appropriatey Legal notices