Changeset - 7584fb11223d
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Bradley Kuhn (bkuhn) - 10 years ago 2014-03-21 16:53:23
bkuhn@ebb.org
I think this text won't be useful.
1 file changed with 0 insertions and 36 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
gpl-lgpl.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -3169,42 +3169,6 @@ additional requirements in violation of the GPL.  It can be seen that
 
additional permissions in other licenses do not raise any problems of license
 
compatibility.
 

	
 
% FIXME: minor rewrites needed
 

	
 
Section 7 relaxes the prohibition on further restrictions slightly by
 
enumerating, in subsection 7b, a limited list of categories of additional
 
requirements that may be placed on code without violating GPLv3.  The list
 
includes the items that were listed in Draft 1, though rewritten for clarity.
 
It also includes a new catchall category for terms that might not obviously
 
fall within one of the other categories but which are precisely equivalent to
 
GPLv3 conditions, or which deny permission for activities clearly not
 
permitted by GPLv3.  We have carefully considered but rejected proposals to
 
expand this list further.  We have also rejected suggestions, made by some
 
discussion committee members, that the Affero clause requirement (7d in Draft
 
1 and 7b4 in Draft 2) be removed, though we have revised it in response to
 
certain comments.  We are unwavering in our view that the Affero requirement
 
is a legitimate one, and we are committed to achieving compatibility of the
 
Affero GPL with GPLv3.
 

	
 
% FIXME: minor rewrites needed
 

	
 
A GPL licensee may place an additional requirement on code for which the
 
licensee has or can give appropriate copyright permission, but only if that
 
requirement falls within the list given in subsection 7b.  Placement of any
 
other kind of additional requirement continues to be a violation of the
 
license.  Additional requirements that are in the 7b list may not be removed,
 
but if a user receives GPL'd code that purports to include an additional
 
requirement not in the 7b list, the user may remove that requirement.  Here
 
we were particularly concerned to address the problem of program authors who
 
purport to license their works in a misleading and possibly
 
self-contradictory fashion, using the GPL together with unacceptable added
 
restrictions that would make those works non-free software.
 

	
 
\section{GPLv3~\S7: Explicit Compatibility}
 

	
 

	
 
% FIXME:  probably mostly still right, needs some updates, though.
 

	
 
In GPLv3 we take a new approach to the issue of combining GPL'd code with
 
code governed by the terms of other free software licenses. Our view, though
 
it was not explicitly stated in GPLv2 itself, was that GPLv2 allowed such
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)