Linus' claim that GPLv2 guarantees quid pro quo for developers is false [LWN.net]

Linus' claim that GPLv2 guarantees quid pro quo for developers is false

Posted Oct 23, 2006 23:56 UTC (Mon) by xoddam (subscriber, #2322)
In reply to: Linux: GPLv3, DRM, and Exceptions (KernelTrap.org) by bronson
Parent article: Linux: GPLv3, DRM, and Exceptions (KernelTrap.org)

> Ah yes, the old run-it-on-a-server hole. Does the GPLv3 change this?

No. The Affero clause (one of the optional additional restrictions) can
address it to some extent.

> It has nothing to do with DRM, of course.

Sorry, I should have edited the subject line. I was addressing the claim
above (expressed also by Linus Torvalds on Groklaw) that people who
improve GPLv2 software are somehow obliged to contribute their
improvements "back", presumably meaning upstream. No such obligation
exists with any version of the GPL -- the obligation is to *users*, not
the original developers.

(Log in to post comments)