Meanwhile, despite many calls by the FSF (and others) for those licensors who

explicitly use this section to come forward and explain their reasoning, no

one ever did.  Furthermore, research conducted during the GPLv3 drafting

process found exactly one licensor who had invoked this section to add an

explicit geographical distribution limitation, and the reasoning for that one

invocation was not fitting with FSF's intended spirit of GPLv2~\S8.  As such,

GPLv2~\S8 was not included at all in GPLv3.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\chapter{Odds, Ends, and Absolutely No Warranty}

GPLv2~\S\S0--7 constitute the freedom-defending terms of the GPLv2.  The remainder

of the GPLv2 handles administrivia and issues concerning warranties and

liability.

\section{GPLv2~\S9: FSF as Stewards of GPL}

\label{GPLv2s9}

FSF reserves the exclusive right to publish future versions of the GPL\@;

GPLv2~\S9 expresses this.  While the stewardship of the copyrights on the body

of GPL'd software around the world is shared among thousands of

individuals and organizations, the license itself needs a single steward.

Forking of the code is often regrettable but basically innocuous.  Forking

of licensing is disastrous.

(Chapter~\ref{tale-of-two-copylefts} discusses more about the various

versions of GPL.)

\section{GPLv2~\S10: Relicensing Permitted}

\label{GPLv2s10}

GPLv2~\S10 reminds the licensee of what is already implied by the nature of

copyright law.  Namely, the copyright holder of a particular software

program has the prerogative to grant alternative agreements under separate

copyright licenses.

\section{GPLv2~\S11: No Warranty}

\label{GPLv2s11}

Most warranty disclaimer language shouts at you.  The

\href{http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-316}{Uniform Commercial

  Code~\S2-316}, which most of the USA's states and commonwealths have adopted as their local

law, allows disclaimers of warranty, provided that the disclaimer is ``conspicuous''.

There is apparently general acceptance that \textsc{all caps} is the

preferred way to make something conspicuous, and that has over decades worked

its way into the voodoo tradition of warranty disclaimer writing.

That said, there is admittedly some authority under USA law suggesting that

conspicuousness can be established by

capitalization and is absent when a disclaimer has the same typeface as the

terms surrounding it (see \textit{Stevenson v.~TRW, Inc.}, 987 F.2d 288, 296

(5th Cir.~1993)).  While GPLv3's drafters doubted that such authority would

apply to copyright licenses like the GPL, the FSF has nevertheless left

warranty and related disclaimers in \textsc{all caps} throughout all versions

of GPL\@.\footnote{One of the authors of this tutorial, Bradley M.~Kuhn, has

  often suggested the aesthetically preferable compromise of a

  \textsc{specifically designed ``small caps'' font, such as this one, as an

    alternative to} WRITING IN ALL CAPS IN THE DEFAULT FONT (LIKE THIS),

  since the latter adds more ugliness than conspicuousness.  Kuhn once

  engaged in reversion war with a lawyer who disagreed, but that lawyer never

  answered Kuhn's requests for case law that argues THIS IS INHERENTLY MORE

  CONSPICUOUS \textsc{Than this is}.}

Critics have occasionally questioned GPL's enforceability in some jurisdictions because its

disclaimer of warranties is impermissibly broad.  However,

critics

have generally failed to articulate specific precedents in their

jurisdictions that would directly indicate a problem with GPL's warranty

disclaimer.  Meanwhile,

\href{http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/text/treaty.html#35}{Article 35 of

  the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of

  Goods} (often abbreviated ``CISG'', which

\href{https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&id=228&chapter=10&lang=en}{many

  countries have adopted}) permits the disclaimer of warranties, so

jurisdictions adopting this treaty allow some form of warranty

disclaimer\footnote{Scholars continue to debate to what extent CISG applies to software

  licenses.  For example, Diedrich concluded that ``CISG is prima facie

  applicable to international transactions involving the transfer of computer

  software for a price'', but Sono disagrees with this ``prevailing view'',

  presenting an ``analysis [that] restricts the applicability of the CISG to

  software transactions by excluding `license contracts'''.  (See

  \href{http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/diedrich1.html}{Frank

    Diedrich, \textit{The CISG and Computer Software Revisited}}, 6 Vindobona

  Journal of International Commercial Law and Arbitration, Supplement 55--75

  (2002), and

\href{http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/sono6.html}{Hiroo Sono,

  \textit{The Applicability and Non-Applicability of the CISG to Software

    Transactions}}, Camilla B. Andersen \& Ulrich G. Schroeter eds., Sharing

International Commercial Law across National Boundaries: Festschrift for

Albert H. Kritzer on the Occasion of his Eightieth Birthday, Wildy, Simmonds

\& Hill Publishing (2008) 512--526.)}.

Nevertheless, to account for possible jurisdictional variances regarding this

or any other issue, GPLv2~\S11 contains

a jurisdictional savings provision, which

states that it is to be interpreted only as broadly as allowed by applicable

law.  Such a provision ensures that both it, and the entire GPL, is

enforceable in any jurisdiction, regardless of any particular law regarding

the permissibility of certain warranty disclaimers.

Finally, one important point to remember when reading GPLv2~\S11 is that GPLv2~\S1

permits the sale of warranty as an additional service, which GPLv2~\S11 affirms.

\section{GPLv2~\S12: Limitation of Liability}

\label{GPLv2s12}

There are many types of warranties, and in some jurisdictions some of them

cannot be disclaimed.  Therefore, usually agreements will have both a

warranty disclaimer and a limitation of liability, as we have in GPLv2~\S12.

GPLv2~\S11 thus gets rid of all implied warranties that can legally be

disavowed. GPLv2~\S12, in turn, limits the liability of the actor for any

warranties that cannot legally be disclaimed in a particular jurisdiction.

Again, some have argued the GPL is unenforceable in some jurisdictions

because its limitation of liability is impermissibly broad. However, \S

12, just like its sister, GPLv2~\S11, contains a jurisdictional savings

provision, which states that it is to be interpreted only as broadly as

allowed by applicable law.  As stated above, such a provision ensures that

both GPLv2~\S12, and the entire GPL, is enforceable in any jurisdiction,

regardless of any particular law regarding the permissibility of limiting

liability.

So end the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\chapter{GPL Version 3}

\label{GPLv3}