Changeset - 9bd27fcffefc
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Bradley Kuhn (bkuhn) - 10 years ago 2014-03-20 18:30:32
bkuhn@ebb.org
Rewrote text for the final parts of GPLv3§5 and early parts of GPLv3§6.
1 file changed with 52 insertions and 64 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
gpl-lgpl.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -1717,6 +1717,7 @@ binaries on the machine itself might not be an option.  While it is
 
recommended that this be the default way that people comply with GPL, the
 
GPL does provide options when such distribution is infeasible.
 

	
 
\label{GPLv2s3-medium-customarily}
 
GPLv2~\S3, therefore, allows source code to be provided on any physical
 
``medium customarily used for software interchange.''  By design, this
 
phrase covers a broad spectrum --- the phrase seeks to pre-adapt to
...
 
@@ -2769,85 +2770,72 @@ words ``at no charge,'' which was often is misunderstood upon na\"{i}ve
 
reading of in GPLv2\S(b) (as discussed in \S~\ref{GPLv2s2-at-no-charge} of this
 
tutorial).
 

	
 
%  FIXME: 5d.  Related to Appropriatey Legal notices
 
%  FIXME-LATER: Write up something on 5d, and related it to Appropriate Legal Notices.
 

	
 

	
 
% follows 5d now, call it the ``final paragraph''
 
Note that of GPLv2~\S2's penultimate and ante-penultimate paragraphs are now
 
handled adequately by the definitions in GPLv3\S0 and as such, have no direct
 
analogs in GPLv3.
 

	
 
The paragraph following subsection 5c has been revised for clarity, but the
 
underlying meaning is unchanged. When independent non-derivative sections are
 
distributed for use in a combination that is a covered work, the whole of the
 
combination must be licensed under the GPL, regardless of the form in which
 
such combination occurs, including combination by dynamic linking. The final
 
sentence of the paragraph adapts this requirement to the new compatibility
 
provisions of section 7.
 

	
 
We have added these words to the aggregation clause to eliminate any question
 
that GPLv3 alters the scope of the copyleft as understood and applied under
 
GPLv2. In GPLv3, as in GPLv2, addition of modules or other parts to a program
 
results in a new program based on the old program, with different functional
 
characteristics created by the merger of two expressions: the original
 
program and the added parts.  Such added parts are ``by their nature
 
extensions of'' the old program, and therefore the entire new program which
 
they and the old program form must be licensed under the GPL.  As subsection
 
5c states, packaging of a work has no bearing on the scope of copyleft.
 
GPLv2~\S2's final paragraph, however, is reworded and expanded into the final
 
paragraph of GPLv3\S5, which now also covers issues related to copyright
 
compilations (but not compilations into object code --- that's in the next
 
section!).  The intent and scope is the same as was intended in GPLv2.
 

	
 
\section{GPLv3~\S6: Non-Source and Corresponding Source}
 
\label{GPLv3s6}
 

	
 
Section 6 of GPLv3, which clarifies and revises GPLv2 section 3, requires
 
distributors of GPL'd object code to provide access to the corresponding
 
source code, in one of four specified ways. As noted above, ``object code''
 
in GPLv3 is defined broadly to mean any non-source version of a work.
 
GPLv3~\S6 clarifies and revises GPLv2~\S3.  It requires distributors of GPL'd
 
object code to provide access to the corresponding source code, in one of
 
four specified ways.  As noted in \S~\ref{GPLv3s0}, ``object code'' in GPLv3
 
is defined broadly to mean any non-source version of a work.
 

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

	
 
Subsections 6a and 6b now apply specifically to distribution of object code
 
in a physical product. Physical products include embedded systems, as well as
 
physical software distribution media such as CDs. As in GPLv2, the
 
distribution of object code may either be accompanied by the machine-readable
 
source code, or it may be accompanied by a written offer to provide the
 
machine-readable source code to any third party. GPLv3 clarifies that the
 
medium for software interchange on which the machine-readable source code is
 
provided must be a durable physical medium. Subsection 6b does not prevent a
 
distributor from offering to provide source code to a third party by some
 
other means, such as transmission over a network, so long as the option of
 
obtaining source code on a physical medium is presented.
 
GPLv3~\S6(a--b) now apply specifically to distribution of object code in a
 
physical product.  Physical products include embedded systems, as well as
 
physical software distribution media such as CDs.  As in GPLv2~\S3 (discussed
 
in \S~\ref{GPLv2s3} of this tutorial), the distribution of object code may
 
either be accompanied by the machine-readable source code, or it may be
 
accompanied by a valid written offer to provide the machine-readable source
 
code.  However, unlike in GPLv2, that offer cannot be exercised by any third
 
party; rather, only those ``who possesses the object code'' it can exercised
 
the offer.  (Note that this is a substantial narrowing of requirements of
 
offer fulfillment, and is a wonderful counterexample to dispute claims that
 
the GPLv3 has more requirements than GPLv2.)
 

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

	
 
Subsection 6b revises the requirements for the written offer to provide
 
source code. As before, the offer must remain valid for at least three
 
years. In addition, even after three years, a distributor of a product
 
GPLv3~\S6(b) further revises the requirements for the written offer to
 
provide source code. As before, the offer must remain valid for at least
 
three years. In addition, even after three years, a distributor of a product
 
containing GPL'd object code must offer to provide source code for as long as
 
the distributor also continues to offer spare parts or customer support for
 
the product model. We believe that this is a reasonable and appropriate
 
requirement; a distributor should be prepared to provide source code if he or
 
she is prepared to provide support for other aspects of a physical product.
 

	
 
% FIXME: 10x language is gone.
 

	
 
Subsection 6b also increases the maximum permitted price for providing a copy
 
of the source code. GPLv2 stated that the price could be no more than the
 
cost of physically performing source distribution; GPLv3 allows the price to
 
be up to ten times the distributor's cost. It may not be practical to expect
 
some organizations to provide such copies at cost. Moreover, permitting such
 
organizations to charge ten times the cost is not particularly harmful, since
 
some recipient of the code can be expected to make the code freely available
 
on a public network server. We also recognize that there is nothing wrong
 
with profiting from providing copies of source code, provided that the price
 
of a copy is not so unreasonably high as to make it effectively unavailable.
 

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

	
 
Subsection 6c gives narrower permission than the corresponding subsection in
 
GPLv2.  The option of including a copy of an offer received in accordance
 
with subsection 6b is available only for private distribution of object code;
 
moreover, such private distribution is restricted to ``occasional
 
non-commercial distribution.''  This subsection makes clear that a
 
distributor cannot comply with the GPL merely by making object code available
 
on a publicly-accessible network server accompanied by a copy of the written
 
offer to provide source code received from an upstream distributor.
 
the product model.  This is a reasonable and appropriate requirement; a
 
distributor should be prepared to provide source code if he or she is
 
prepared to provide support for other aspects of a physical product.
 

	
 
GPLv3~\S6(a--b) clarifies that the medium for software interchange on which
 
the machine-readable source code is provided must be a durable physical
 
medium.  GPLv3~\S6(b)(2), however, permits a distributor to instead offer to
 
provide source code from a network server instead, which is yet another
 
example GPLv3 looser in its requirements than GPLv2 (see
 
\S~\ref{GPLv2s3-medium-customarily} for details).
 

	
 
% FIXME-LATER: more information about source provision, cost of physically
 
% performing, reasonable fees, medium customary clearly being said durable
 
% connecting back to previous text
 

	
 
GPLv3\S6(c) gives narrower permission than GPLv2\S3(c).  The ``pass along''
 
option for GPLv3\S6(c)(1) offers is now available only for individual
 
distribution of object code; moreover, such individual distribution can occur
 
only ``occasionally and noncommercially.''  A distributor cannot comply with
 
the GPL merely by making object code available on a publicly-accessible
 
network server accompanied by a copy of the written offer to provide source
 
code received from an upstream distributor.
 

	
 
%FIXME-LATER: tie back to the discussion of the occasional offer pass along
 
%             stuff in GPLv2 this 
 

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

	
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)