[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GPL v3? Other license options?





On 8/17/07, Ed W <..hidden..> wrote:
Chris Travers wrote:
> I have been trying to formulate my thinking about whether this project
> should upgrade the license to version 3 of the GNU GPL.


Can someone point me to a summary of what V3 actually says?  V2 is
poorly understood at the best of times, and although I have followed the
debate about V3, I confess that I don't really understand the key
highlights of the licence...

Honestly, the more I read the GPL v3, the less I understand it, which is a bad sign ;-)

Quick overview (IANAL, this is just my impression, etc);
1)  Arguably limits the definition of corresponding source code to exclude optional dependencies.
2)  No locking of consumers out of their hardware (unsure if this has any teeth or if 7b legal notices could enforce machine-readible corresponding flags thereby rendering this meaningless, also creating invarient portions of *code*).
3)  All interactive interfaces must include licensing information.
4)  Ability for code to be included in Affero General Public License (this is one-way, we would have to adopt the AGPL to get modifications back, ick.)

 Also the license is 3 times as long as v2 and *far* harder to read/understand.

I'm sure I'm not alone?  Is there a summary anywhere?

No you are not.  I would check Wikipedia and the FSF's information (though I question the accuracy of both). 

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers