| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Better the FSF than the rest of the industryBetter the FSF than the rest of the industryPosted Mar 23, 2006 23:19 UTC (Thu) by sepreece (subscriber, #19270)In reply to: Better the FSF than the rest of the industry by Wol Parent article: No GPLv2-only projects on Savannah
Umm, the GPL i a license that an author might choose to use to control distribution of her code. While the FSF controlled the writing of that license, I don't think there's any legal sense in which the "similar in spirit" clause actually constrains the FSF or future versions of the GPL. Nor is there any way an author can "retract" the "or later version" language once the code has been distributed under that license - anybody receiving a version under a license containing the "or any later version" language is free to choose any such version, whether it's in the same spirit or not. IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that once you've set the license terms, you're stuck with them (though you could, of course, use different license language for a later version - as the author, you can specify the terms you like each time you distribute the code.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||