First draft of section regarding "or-later".
Includes labels needed for forward-references used herein.
This commit is contained in:
parent
79941dd334
commit
163368ebf8
1 changed files with 67 additions and 1 deletions
68
gpl-lgpl.tex
68
gpl-lgpl.tex
|
@ -867,6 +867,69 @@ GPLv3 and its terms are discussed in detail in Chapter\~ref{GPLv3}.
|
|||
|
||||
\section{The Innovation of Optional ``Or Any Later'' Version}
|
||||
|
||||
An interesting fact of all GPL licenses is that the are ultimate multiple
|
||||
choices for use of the license. The FSF is the primary steward of GPL (as
|
||||
discussed later in \S~\ref{GPLv2s9} and \S~\ref{GPLv2s14}). However, those
|
||||
who wish to license works under GPL are not required to automatically accept
|
||||
changes made by the FSF for their own copyrighted works.
|
||||
|
||||
Each licensor may chose three different methods of licensing, as follows:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item explicitly name a single version of GPL for their work (usually
|
||||
indicated in shorthand by saying the license is ``GPLv$X$-only''), or
|
||||
|
||||
\item name no version of the GPL, thus they allow their downstream recipients
|
||||
to select any version of the GPL they chose (usually indicated in shorthand
|
||||
by saying the license is simply ``GPL''), or
|
||||
|
||||
\item name a specific version of GPL and give downstream recipients the
|
||||
option to chose that version ``or any later version as published by the
|
||||
FSF'' (usually indicated by saying the license is
|
||||
``GPLv$X$-or-later'')\footnote{The shorthand of ``GPL$X+$'' is also popular
|
||||
for this situation. The authors of this tutorial prefer ``-or-later''
|
||||
syntax, because it (a) mirrors the words ``or'' and ``later from the
|
||||
licensing statement, (b) the $X+$ doesn't make it abundantly clear that
|
||||
$X$ is clearly included as a license option and (c) the $+$ symbol has
|
||||
other uses in computing (such as with regular expressions) that mean
|
||||
something different.}
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\label{license-compatibility-first-mentioned}
|
||||
|
||||
Oddly, this flexibility has received (in the opinion of the authors, undue)
|
||||
criticism, primarily because of the complex and oft-debated notion of
|
||||
``license compatibility'' (which is explained in detail in
|
||||
\S~\ref{license-compatibility}). Copyleft licenses are generally
|
||||
incompatible with each other, because the details of how they implement
|
||||
copyleft differs. Specifically, copyleft works only because of its
|
||||
requirement that downstream licensors use the \texit{same} license for
|
||||
combined and modified works. As such, software licensed under the terms of
|
||||
``GPLv2-only'' cannot be combined with works licensed ``GPLv3-or-later''.
|
||||
This is admittedly a frustrating outcome.
|
||||
|
||||
Other copyleft licenses that appeared after GPL, such
|
||||
as the Creative Commons ``Share Alike'' licenses, the Eclipse Public License
|
||||
and the Mozilla Public License \textbf{require} all copyright holders chosing
|
||||
to use any version of those licenses to automatically accept and relicense
|
||||
their copyrighted works under new versions. Of course ,Creative Commons, the
|
||||
Eclipse Foundation, and the Mozilla Foundation (like the FSF) have generally
|
||||
served as excellent stewards of their licenses. Copyright holders using
|
||||
those licenses seems to find it acceptable that to fully delegate all future
|
||||
licensing decisions for their copyrights to these organizations without a
|
||||
second thought.
|
||||
|
||||
However, note that FSF gives herein the control of copyright holders to
|
||||
decide whether or not to implicitly trust the FSF in its work of drafting
|
||||
future GPL versions. The FSF, for its part, does encourage copyright holders
|
||||
to chose by default ``GPLv$X$-or-later'' (where $X$ is the most recent
|
||||
version of the GPL published by the FSF). However, the FSF \textbf{does not
|
||||
mandate} that a choice to use any GPL requires a copyright holder ceding
|
||||
its authority for future licensing decisions to the FSF. In fact, the FSF
|
||||
considered this possibility for GPLv3 and chose not to do so, instead opting
|
||||
for the third-party steward designation clause discussed in
|
||||
Section~\ref{GPlv3S14}.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Complexities of Two Simultaneously Popular Copylefts}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -2078,6 +2141,9 @@ So end the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License.
|
|||
|
||||
\section{GPLv3 \S 6: Non-Source and Corresponding Source}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Understanding License Compatibility}
|
||||
\label{license-compatibility}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{GPLv3 \S 7: Explicit Compatibility}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{GPLv3 \S 8: A Lighter Termination}
|
||||
|
@ -2093,7 +2159,7 @@ So end the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License.
|
|||
\section{GPLv3 \S 13: The Great Affero Compromise}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{GPLv3 \S 14: So, When's GPLv4?}
|
||||
|
||||
\label{GPlv2s14}
|
||||
\section{GPLv3 \S 15--17: Warranty Disclaimers and Liability Limitation}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue