Changeset - 6ba2ff285f10
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Martin Michlmayr (tbm) - 10 years ago 2014-04-24 23:12:21
tbm@cyrius.com
Add missing label
1 file changed with 1 insertions and 0 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
gpl-lgpl.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -3248,48 +3248,49 @@ reinstatement of rights. The termination procedure provides a limited
 
opportunity to cure license violations.  If a licensee has committed a
 
first-time violation of the GPL with respect to a given copyright holder, but
 
the licensee cures the violation within 30 days following receipt of notice
 
of the violation, then any of the licensee's GPL rights that have been
 
terminated by the copyright holder are ``automatically reinstated''.
 

	
 

	
 
Finally, if a licensee violates the GPL, a contributor may terminate any
 
patent licenses that it granted under GPLv3~\S11, in addition to any
 
copyright permissions the contributor granted to the licensee.
 

	
 
% FIXME-LATER: write more here, perhaps linking up to enforcement
 

	
 
\section{GPLv3~\S9: Acceptance}
 

	
 
GPLv3~\S9 means what it says: mere receipt or execution of code neither
 
requires nor signifies contractual acceptance under the GPL.  Speaking more
 
broadly, GPLv3 is intentionally structured as a unilateral grant
 
of copyright permissions, the basic operation of which exists outside of any
 
law of contract.  Whether and when a contractual relationship is formed
 
between licensor and licensee under local law do not necessarily matter to
 
the working of the license.
 

	
 
\section{GPLv3~\S10: Explicit Downstream License}
 
\label{GPLv3s10}
 

	
 
% FIXME-LATER: this is a punt: need more time to write!
 

	
 
GPLv3~\S10 ensures that everyone downstream receives licenses from all
 
copyright holders.  It really is a generally straightforward section.
 

	
 
% FIXME-LATER: link up this paragraph to above sections.
 

	
 
Note, however, GPLv3 removed the words ``at no charge'' from GPLv2~\S2(b) (in
 
GPLv3,~\S5(b)) because it contributed to a misconception that the GPL did not
 
permit charging for distribution of copies.  The purpose of the ``at no
 
charge'' wording was to prevent attempts to collect royalties from third
 
parties.  The removal of these words created the danger that the imposition
 
of licensing fees would no longer be seen as a license violation.  Therefore,
 
GPLv3~\S10 adds a new explicit prohibition on imposition of licensing fees or
 
royalties.  This section is an appropriate place for such a clause, since it
 
is a specific consequence of the general requirement that no further
 
restrictions be imposed on downstream recipients of GPL-covered code.
 

	
 
% FIXME-LATER: This text needs further study before I can conclude it belongs
 
% in this tutorial:
 

	
 
%% Careful readers of the GPL have suggested that its explicit prohibition
 
%% against imposition of further restrictions\footnote{GPLv2, section 6; Draft
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)