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

Re: gkrellm license change notificaition



Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 17:00 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:

As said in my previous post, one could argue that they were not distributable then in the first place because:
1) They are a derived work of gkrellm
2) gkrellm was licensed GPL v2 or (at your option) any later version
3) having a derived work of gkrellm that allows only gpl v2 would be placing an
    additional restriction on distributing, which is not allowed.

IANAL but I think this is fallacious.  gkrellm is giving me a license to
use the software/code in any way that I see fit so long as I follow the
GPLv2 or *(at my option)* any later version.  So I can accept the
gkrellm code under a GPLv2-only license and write my plugin with that
understanding.  I could also accept the gkrellm code under GPLv3-only
and write my plugin to that.


You can write your plugin no matter what, because the GPL is about distributing, if you distribute your derived work, you must do so under the conditions of the original work, and those conditions say that you may not impose additional restrictions, taking away the receivers right to distribute the received derived work under a later version of the GPL is a further restriction.

Regards,

Hans


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