[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] ANNOUNCE: Moving Sugar to GPLv3+
christoph.derndorfer at gmail.com
Fri Apr 22 17:58:03 EDT 2011
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Martin Langhoff
<martin.langhoff at gmail.com>wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:54 PM, C. Scott Ananian <cscott at laptop.org>
> > Yes, you seem to be confused Bernie. You can redistribute under a
> > license however you like, usually without explicitly stating it. But
> > if you alter the source files or replace COPYING, you are *changing
> > the license*. That is a different act.
> You are right but in practice in this case there isn't much difference.
> Anybody, following GPLv2, can just redistribute it under GPLv3, and
> you *could* track each file as to GPLv2, v3, or mixed. But that would
> be a lot of bureaucracy that wouldn't help anyone -- anybody
> interested in GPLv2 sources should just go to the last commit or
> release under v2.
> > A more passive-aggressive means to your end might be to announce that
> > SugarLabs will only accept new contributions which are licensed
> > GPLv3+. That will effect the redistribution change you want, while
> > still (a) pissing off parts of the community, and (b) not illegally
> > altering the license on code you do not own.
> Honestly, option b is rather annoying if relevant authors/owners of
> the copyright aren't in agreement. But it has notthing illegal.
> The "copyright lines" are advisory only, and nonbinding. Of course,
> courts look unfavourably upon knowing infringers that remove (as upon
> anyone found hiding evidence) them but they aren't sacred in the
> normal course of things.
Before this thread ends up something that only copyright lawyers really
understand I'd like to take a step back and ask what the SLOB's rationale
behind the proposed motion to move from GPLv2 to GPLv3 is? In other words:
What specific advantages does GPLv3 offer for Sugar, its community and the
individuals, groups, and organizations/deployments using it?
e-mail: christoph at olpcnews.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the IAEP