| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
GPLv3 & additional permissions/restrictionsGPLv3 & additional permissions/restrictionsPosted Sep 26, 2006 12:27 UTC (Tue) by mingo (subscriber, #31122)In reply to: GPLv3 & additional permissions/restrictions by robilad Parent article: Some GPLv3 clarifications from the FSF that was never meant to be an additional permission. See: this collection of emails from Linus. What constitutes derived work isnt Linus' job to determine: it's a matter of law. (the GPLv2 is pretty silent on the issue so what controls is copyright law)
(Log in to post comments)
GPLv3 & additional permissions/restrictions Posted Sep 26, 2006 13:21 UTC (Tue) by robilad (guest, #27163) [Link] Oh, I fully agree with that, I'm just pointing out that the kernel itself has an additional note on top of the GPLv2 regarding the desired interpretation of the permissions in the license. There is nothing wrong in that, and I don't mean to nitpick whether it's a mere clarification, or an additional permission, or something else.
My point above was that some large projects find it useful to clarify or extend the permissions contained in their GPLv2-based licensing terms through such additions to the GPLv2. That practice has so far not had the negative consequences alluded to in gregkh's piece, despite going on for a long time.
Open Source seems quite alive, actually. :)
|
|
||||||||||||