Garrett: The ongoing fight against GPL enforcement

Posted Jan 31, 2012 21:32 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
In reply to: Garrett: The ongoing fight against GPL enforcement by landley
Parent article: Garrett: The ongoing fight against GPL enforcement

Did you know they replaced the Binutils 2.17 tarball on their website with one that contains GPLv3 source files? Yup, they've RETROACTIVELY relicensed binutils 2.17, in a sneaky manner that requires examining the top of each source file to see what license is on each one.

You've been told this is wrong and pointed at links indicating just why it is wrong.

Either you are arguing in bad faith or you are just not paying attention. I don't know which and I don't much care.

Garrett: The ongoing fight against GPL enforcement

Posted Jan 31, 2012 23:11 UTC (Tue) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link]

I was pointed at links indicating that they knew they were doing it, I wasn't pointed at any links indicating that the new files in the tarball weren't GPLv3 when the notices on them say they are.

Are you claiming these new files are "mere aggregation"? The FSF is claiming that the old files weren't "complete source", and that they had to add GPLv3 files to make complete source, and that if you add GPLv3 files to a GPLv2 or later program the result is that the whole can only be distributed under the terms of GPLv3.

How is this interpretation wrong?

Rob