4 ms·

Starting from v3 no, thats why many projects are still on GPL v2

by ex3ndr 6y ago

sokoloff 6y ago
Could you expand on that? Suppose there’s a library “foo” licensed under GPL v3 or later. GPLv4 comes out and has a term I don’t like (maybe it says “may not be used by anyone with more than 2 ‘o’s in their name”). Am I not free to use foo under the v3 terms, ignoring “or later”? From the v3 license: Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU General Public License “or any later version” applies to it, you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of the GNU General Public License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation.
- johannes1234321 6y ago
  You continue to be able to use it under GPLv3 terms, but if you distribute it (and don't hold the full copyright) you must distribute it in a "or newer" compatible way.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    Interesting. I’m not sure if I don’t understand or if I disagree. Let’s imagine it’s 2005, I’m TiVo, and the Linux kernel was licensed under “v2 or later”* and GPL v2 is the latest version of the license that exists. I ship a product using the Linux kernel complying with the GPLv2. FSF dislikes what I’ve done and releases a v3 license in 2006. I claim that in 2007, I’m still allowed to ship my product, by electing to “follow the terms and conditions” of the v2 version of the license and only if Linux relicenses itself as “v3 or later” could I not ship such later licensed versions but I could keep shipping my product as-was with a “v2 or later” kernel, even though my product is compliant with the v2 distribution terms but not with the v3 terms. Q1. Do you see it differently? Further, someone else could start a ViTo company in 2008 and ship a same conditions product without violating the GPL “v2 or later” (that there isn’t anything special about TiVo doing it before v3 was released). Q2. Does that change anything? * - I know Linux kernel is “v2 exactly”, but this was the simplest readily understandable example I could think of, so let’s use that incorrect hypothetical here.
    - johannes1234321 6y ago
      I would say it's complicated. The scenario in my head is like this: I take "GPL3 or newer" software and build my derived software on top and distribute that without thinking about the "or newer clause" now G pLv4 comes along, my user has the "GPLv3 or newer" component and uses GPLv4 with it, which might have requirements impacting my software ... or not ... I don't know. All I can say: that "or newer" exists and a misguided FSF can cause trouble (see also outcry with GPLv3, where people removed the or newer clause for those reasons)
- ex3ndr 6y ago
  GPL v3 have "or later" in it's body. So any GPLv3 licensed code automatically licensed under GPLv4 once it would be available.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    I believe that the text "you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered version or of any later version" means that it is still available to be used under the terms and conditions of GPLv3 or GPLv4 at the option of the person using the code (such that if v4 prohibited use by people with 3 o's in their name, I could still use foo under the v3 terms). Do you claim that once v4 is published I cannot use code licensed as "v3 or later" by complying with the v3 terms and conditions? That seems to me to directly contradict the language in the license. I agree that "v3 or later" code automatically is available for use under v4 terms once v4 is published, but it also remains available under v3 terms.

Starting from v3 no, thats why many projects are still on GPL v2

by ex3ndr 6y ago

Starting from v3 no, thats why many projects are still on GPL v2

Could you expand on that? Suppose there’s a library “foo” licensed under GPL v3 or later. GPLv4 comes out and has a term I don’t like (maybe it says “may not be used by anyone with more than 2 ‘o’s in their name”). Am I not free to use foo under the v3 terms, ignoring “or later”? From the v3 license: Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU General Public License “or any later version” applies to it, you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of the GNU General Public License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation.

johannes1234321 6y ago
You continue to be able to use it under GPLv3 terms, but if you distribute it (and don't hold the full copyright) you must distribute it in a "or newer" compatible way.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  Interesting. I’m not sure if I don’t understand or if I disagree. Let’s imagine it’s 2005, I’m TiVo, and the Linux kernel was licensed under “v2 or later”* and GPL v2 is the latest version of the license that exists. I ship a product using the Linux kernel complying with the GPLv2. FSF dislikes what I’ve done and releases a v3 license in 2006. I claim that in 2007, I’m still allowed to ship my product, by electing to “follow the terms and conditions” of the v2 version of the license and only if Linux relicenses itself as “v3 or later” could I not ship such later licensed versions but I could keep shipping my product as-was with a “v2 or later” kernel, even though my product is compliant with the v2 distribution terms but not with the v3 terms. Q1. Do you see it differently? Further, someone else could start a ViTo company in 2008 and ship a same conditions product without violating the GPL “v2 or later” (that there isn’t anything special about TiVo doing it before v3 was released). Q2. Does that change anything? * - I know Linux kernel is “v2 exactly”, but this was the simplest readily understandable example I could think of, so let’s use that incorrect hypothetical here.
  - johannes1234321 6y ago
    I would say it's complicated. The scenario in my head is like this: I take "GPL3 or newer" software and build my derived software on top and distribute that without thinking about the "or newer clause" now G pLv4 comes along, my user has the "GPLv3 or newer" component and uses GPLv4 with it, which might have requirements impacting my software ... or not ... I don't know. All I can say: that "or newer" exists and a misguided FSF can cause trouble (see also outcry with GPLv3, where people removed the or newer clause for those reasons)
ex3ndr 6y ago
GPL v3 have "or later" in it's body. So any GPLv3 licensed code automatically licensed under GPLv4 once it would be available.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  I believe that the text "you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered version or of any later version" means that it is still available to be used under the terms and conditions of GPLv3 or GPLv4 at the option of the person using the code (such that if v4 prohibited use by people with 3 o's in their name, I could still use foo under the v3 terms). Do you claim that once v4 is published I cannot use code licensed as "v3 or later" by complying with the v3 terms and conditions? That seems to me to directly contradict the language in the license. I agree that "v3 or later" code automatically is available for use under v4 terms once v4 is published, but it also remains available under v3 terms.