24 Jan
2008
24 Jan
'08
2:41 p.m.
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 21:15 +0100, Esben Stien wrote:
I'm glad that GPLv3 fixes this issue, cause if you
state that the
software is under GPLv3 you may not impose any further restrictions on
the work, if I read the license correctly.
You read it wrong. For two different reasons. First, the same mistake
than Arnold made earlier. The GPL (whatever version) is the text that
lays out the terms of a license. Anyone can refer to this text but then
add exceptions, extensions. I can even say "Its licensed under the terms
of GPLv3 excluding every clause, plus the follow paragraph...".
Second, what GPLv3 prohibits is someone taking a work that you licensed
to them, and adding restrictions when they license it to others. You,
the author, are not bound by anything in the license that you give to
others.
What you cannot do *with* the GPL (any version) is change the wording
and call the new wording "the GPL". So you cannot add/remove a clause,
include the license with your software, but still call the license "the
GPL". As far as I know nobody does that.
--p