Changeset - 110f9ece935a
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Bradley Kuhn (bkuhn) - 10 years ago 2014-03-21 16:53:20
bkuhn@ebb.org
Rewrote paragraphs on additional permissions.
1 file changed with 19 insertions and 20 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
gpl-lgpl.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -3087,25 +3087,25 @@ provide warranty or support for the User Product itself.
 

	
 
% FIXME: more about license compatibility here.
 

	
 
A challenge that faced the Free Software community heavily through out the
 
early 2000s was the proliferation of incompatible Free Software licenses.  Of
 
course, we cannot make the GPL compatible with all such licenses. GPLv3
 
contains provisions that are designed to reduce license incompatibility by
 
making it easier for developers to combine code carrying non-GPL terms with
 
GPL'd code.
 

	
 
% FIXME: connecting text
 

	
 
\subsection{Additional Permissions}
 
\subsection{GPLv3~\S7: Additional Permissions}
 

	
 
The GPL is a statement of permissions, some of which have conditions.
 
Additional terms --- terms that supplement those of the GPL --- may come to be
 
placed on, or removed from, GPL-covered code in certain common ways.
 
Copyleft licensing theorists have generally called
 
 those added terms ``additional permissions'' if they grant
 
exceptions from the conditions of the GPL, and ``additional requirements'' if
 
they add conditions to the basic permissions of the GPL\@. The treatment of
 
additional permissions and additional requirements under GPLv3 is necessarily
 
asymmetrical, because they do not raise the same interpretive
 
issues; in particular, additional requirements, if allowed without careful
 
limitation, could transform a GPL'd program into a non-free one.
...
 
@@ -3113,60 +3113,59 @@ limitation, could transform a GPL'd program into a non-free one.
 
With these principles in the background, GPLv3~\S7  answers the following
 
questions: 
 
\begin{enumerate}
 
\item How do the presence of additional terms on all or part of a GPL'd program
 
affect users' rights?
 

	
 
\item When and how may a licensee add terms to code being
 
distributed under the GPL? 
 

	
 
\item When may a licensee remove additional terms?
 
\end{enumerate}
 

	
 
% FIXME: FSF third person, etc.
 

	
 
Additional permissions present the easier case.  We have licensed some of our
 
own software under GPLv2 with permissive exceptions that allow combination
 
with non-free code, and that allow removal of those permissions by downstream
 
recipients; similarly, LGPLv2.1 is in essence a permissive variant of GPLv2,
 
and it permits relicensing under the GPL.  We have generalized these
 
practices in section 7.  A licensee may remove any additional permission from
 
Additional permissions present the easier case.  Since the mid-1990s,
 
permissive exceptions often appeared alongside GPLv2 with permissive
 
exceptions to allow combination
 
with certain non-free code.  Typically, downstream
 
stream recipients could remove those exceptions and operate under pure GPLv2.
 
Similarly, LGPLv2.1 is in essence a permissive variant of GPLv2,
 
and it permits relicensing under the GPL\@.  
 

	
 
\sectin
 
These practices are now generalized via GPLv3~\S7.
 
A licensee may remove any additional permission from
 
a covered work, whether it was placed by the original author or by an
 
upstream distributor.  A licensee may also add any kind of additional
 
permission to any part of a work for which the licensee has, or can give,
 
appropriate copyright permission. For example, if the licensee has written
 
that part, the licensee is the copyright holder for that part and can
 
therefore give additional permissions that are applicable to it.
 
Alternatively, the part may have been written by someone else and licensed,
 
with the additional permissions, to that licensee.  Any additional
 
permissions on that part are, in turn, removable by downstream recipients.
 
As subsection 7a explains, the effect of an additional permission depends on
 
As GPLv3~\S7\P1 explains, the effect of an additional permission depends on
 
whether the permission applies to the whole work or a part.
 

	
 
% FIXME: rework this a bit
 
% FIXME-LATER: LGPLv3 will have its own section
 

	
 
We have drafted version 3 of the GNU LGPL, which we have released with Draft
 
2 of GPLv3, as a simple list of additional permissions supplementing the
 
terms of GPLv3.  Section 7 has thus provided the basis for recasting a
 
Indeed, LGPLv3 is itself simply  a list of additional permissions supplementing the
 
terms of GPLv3.  GPLv3\S7 has thus provided the basis for recasting a
 
formally complex license as an elegant set of added terms, without changing
 
any of the fundamental features of the existing LGPL.  We offer this draft of
 
LGPLv3 as as a model for developers wishing to license their works under the
 
any of the fundamental features of the existing LGPL\@.  LGPLv3 is thus  a model for developers wishing to license their works under the
 
GPL with permissive exceptions.  The removability of additional permissions
 
under section 7 does not alter any existing behavior of the LGPL; the LGPL
 
has always allowed relicensing under the ordinary GPL.
 
under GPLv3\S7 does not alter any existing behavior of the LGPL since the LGPL
 
has always allowed relicensing under the ordinary GPL\@.
 

	
 
\subsection{Additional Requirements and License Compatibility}
 

	
 
% FIXME: minor rewrites needed
 

	
 
We broadened the title of section 7 because license compatibility, as it is
 
conventionally understood, is only one of several facets of the placement of
 
additional terms on GPL'd code.  The license compatibility issue arises for
 
three reasons.  First, the GPL is a strong copyleft license, requiring
 
modified versions to be distributed under the GPL.  Second, the GPL states
 
that no further restrictions may be placed on the rights of recipients.
 
Third, all other free software licenses in common use contain certain
 
requirements, many of which are not conditions made by the GPL.  Thus, when
 
GPL'd code is modified by combination with code covered by another formal
 
license that specifies other requirements, and that modified code is then
 
distributed to others, the freedom of recipients may be burdened by
 
additional requirements in violation of the GPL.  It can be seen that
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)