Edit pasted automatic downstream license text.
This pasted text was quite useful and well-written. I've incorporated it fully, although it needed some copy edit work and additional material.
This commit is contained in:
parent
bf85191e63
commit
d6bf6f07b1
1 changed files with 20 additions and 14 deletions
32
gpl-lgpl.tex
32
gpl-lgpl.tex
|
@ -2270,28 +2270,34 @@ In short, GPLv2~\S6 says that your license for the software is your one and
|
|||
only copyright license allowing you to copy, modify and distribute the
|
||||
software.
|
||||
|
||||
% FIXME-URGENT: integrate
|
||||
% Also, link to GPLv3 section
|
||||
|
||||
This is GPLv2’s ``automatic downstream licensing'' provision. Each time you
|
||||
GPLv2~\S6 is GPLv2’s ``automatic downstream licensing''
|
||||
provision\footnote{This section was substantially expanded for clarity and
|
||||
detail in \hyperref[GPLv3s10]{GPLv3~\S10}.. Each time you
|
||||
redistribute a GPL’d program, the recipient automatically receives a license
|
||||
from each original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the program subject
|
||||
to the conditions of the license. There is no requirement to take any action
|
||||
to ensure the downstream recipient’s acceptance of the license terms, see
|
||||
above. This places every copyright holder in the chain of descent of the code
|
||||
to the conditions of the license. The redistributor need not take any
|
||||
to ensure the downstream recipient’s acceptance of the license terms.
|
||||
This places every copyright holder in the chain of descent of the code
|
||||
in legal privity, or direct relationship, with every downstream
|
||||
redistributor. Two legal effects follow. First, as \S6 says, parties
|
||||
themselves remaining in compliance have valid permissions for all actions
|
||||
including modification and redistribution even if their immediate upstream
|
||||
supplier of the software has been terminated for license violation. Their
|
||||
redistributor. Two legal effects follow. First, downstream parties
|
||||
who remain in compliance have valid permissions for all actions
|
||||
(including modification and redistribution) even if their immediate upstream
|
||||
supplier of the software has been terminated for license
|
||||
violation\footnote{While this is legally true, as a practical matter, a
|
||||
failure of ``complete, corresponding source'' (CCS) provisioning by an
|
||||
upstream could make it effectively impossible for a downstream party to
|
||||
engage in a commercial redistribution pursuant to
|
||||
\hyperref[GPLv2s3]{GPLv2~\S3(a--b)}. (\S~\ref{upstream} in the Compliance
|
||||
Guide portion of this tutorial discussed related details.)}.
|
||||
Downstream's
|
||||
licensed rights are not dependent on compliance of their upstream, because
|
||||
their licenses issue directly from the copyright holder. Second, automatic
|
||||
termination cannot be cured by obtaining additional copies from an alternate
|
||||
supplier: the license permissions emanate only from the original licensors,
|
||||
and if they have automatically terminated permission, no act by any
|
||||
intermediate license holder can restore those terminated rights.
|
||||
intermediate license holder can restore those terminated
|
||||
rights.
|
||||
|
||||
%FIXME-URGENT: end
|
||||
\section{GPLv2~\S7: ``Give Software Liberty or Give It Death!''}
|
||||
\label{GPLv2s7}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue