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

copy edits

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
donaldr3 2014-03-21 12:50:20 -04:00
parent 9e27cbe2b0
commit d622ef22d1
1 changed files with 4 additions and 4 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

8
compliance-guide.tex
View file

@ -807,7 +807,7 @@ once you open the channels of communication in a friendly way.
\section{Termination}
Many redistributors overlook GPL's termination provision (GPLv2~\S~4 and
Many redistributors overlook the GPL's termination provision (GPLv2~\S~4 and
GPLv3~\S~8). Under v2, violators forfeit their rights to redistribute and
modify the GPL'd software until those rights are explicitly reinstated by
the copyright holder. In contrast, v3 allows violators to rapidly resolve
@ -880,12 +880,12 @@ copyright holders often require.
often want a company to demonstrate compliance for all GPL'd software in
a distribution, not just their own. A copyright holder may refuse to
reinstate your right to distribute one program unless and until you
comply with the licenses of all Open Source and Free Software in your distribution.
comply with the licenses of all Free Software in your distribution.
\item {\bf Notification to past recipients}. Users to whom you previously
distributed non-compliant software should receive a communication
(email, letter, bill insert, etc.) indicating the violation, describing
their rights under GPL, and informing them how to obtain a gratis source
their rights under the GPL, and informing them how to obtain a gratis source
distribution. If a customer list does not exist (such as in reseller
situations), an alternative form of notice may be required (such as a
magazine advertisement).
@ -893,7 +893,7 @@ copyright holders often require.
\item {\bf Appointment of a GPL Compliance Officer.} The software freedom community
values personal accountability when things go wrong. Copyright holders
often require that you name someone within the violating company
officially responsible for Open Source and Free Software license compliance, and that this
officially responsible for Free Software license compliance, and that this
individual serve as the key public contact for the community when
compliance concerns arise.