diff --git a/gpl-lgpl.tex b/gpl-lgpl.tex
index 545e914aefbf2e24805c544fe00bb89c7590d413..2db26b3daf5a6ad308e7fb2e33df861b3cb7aa38 100644
--- a/gpl-lgpl.tex
+++ b/gpl-lgpl.tex
@@ -1898,59 +1898,60 @@ implied patent license to any of its patents that cover that program.
 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 \chapter{Defending Freedom on Many Fronts}
 
-Chapters~\ref{run-and-verbatim} and ~\ref{source-and-binary} presented the
-core freedom-defending provisions of GPLv2\@, which are in GPLv2~\S\S0--3. \S\S
-4--7 of the GPLv2 are designed to ensure that GPLv2~\S\S0--3 are not infringed,
-are enforceable, are kept to the confines of copyright law, and are not
-trumped by other copyright agreements or components of other entirely
-separate legal systems. In short, while GPLv2~\S\S0--3 are the parts of the
-license that defend the freedoms of users and programmers, GPLv2~\S\S4--7 are
-the parts of the license that keep the playing field clear so that \S\S
-0--3 can do their jobs.
+Chapters~\ref{run-and-verbatim} and~\ref{source-and-binary} presented the
+core freedom-defending provisions of GPLv2\@, which are in GPLv2~\S\S0--3.
+GPLv2\S\S~4--7 of the GPLv2 are designed to ensure that GPLv2~\S\S0--3 are
+not infringed, are enforceable, are kept to the confines of copyright law but
+also  not trumped by other copyright agreements or components of other
+entirely separate legal systems.  In short, while GPLv2~\S\S0--3 are the parts
+of the license that defend the freedoms of users and programmers,
+GPLv2~\S\S4--7 are the parts of the license that keep the playing field clear
+so that \S\S 0--3 can do their jobs.
 
 \section{GPLv2~\S4: Termination on Violation}
 \label{GPLv2s4}
 
-GPLv2~\S4 is GPLv2's termination clause. Upon first examination, it seems
+GPLv2~\S4 is GPLv2's termination clause.  Upon first examination, it seems
 strange that a license with the goal of defending users' and programmers'
 freedoms for perpetuity in an irrevocable way would have such a clause.
 However, upon further examination, the difference between irrevocability
 and this termination clause becomes clear.
 
 The GPL is irrevocable in the sense that once a copyright holder grants
-rights for someone to copy, modify and redistribute the software under
-terms of the GPL, they cannot later revoke that grant. Since the GPL has
-no provision allowing the copyright holder to take such a prerogative, the
+rights for someone to copy, modify and redistribute the software under terms
+of the GPL, they cannot later revoke that grant.  Since the GPL has no
+provision allowing the copyright holder to take such a prerogative, the
 license is granted as long as the copyright remains in effect.\footnote{In
-  the USA, due to unfortunate legislation, the length of copyright is
-  nearly perpetual, even though the Constitution forbids perpetual
-  copyright.} The copyright holder has the right to relicense the same
-work under different licenses (see Section~\ref{Proprietary Relicensing}
-of this tutorial), or to stop distributing the GPLv2'd version (assuming \S
-3(b) was never used), but she may not revoke the rights under GPLv2
-already granted.
+  the USA, due to unfortunate legislation, the length of copyright is nearly
+  perpetual, even though the Constitution forbids perpetual copyright.} The
+copyright holders have the right to relicense the same work under different
+licenses (see Section~\ref{Proprietary Relicensing} of this tutorial), or to
+stop distributing the GPLv2'd version (assuming GPLv2~\S3(b) was never used),
+but they may not revoke the rights under GPLv2 already granted.
 
 In fact, when an entity looses their right to copy, modify and distribute
-GPL'd software, it is because of their \emph{own actions}, not that of
-the copyright holder. The copyright holder does not decided when GPLv2~\S4
-termination occurs (if ever), the actions of the licensee does.
+GPL'd software, it is because of their \emph{own actions}, not that of the
+copyright holder.  The copyright holder does not decided when GPLv2~\S4
+termination occurs (if ever); rather, the actions of the licensee determine
+that.
 
 Under copyright law, the GPL has granted various rights and freedoms to
 the licensee to perform specific types of copying, modification, and
-redistribution. By default, all other types of copying, modification, and
-redistribution are prohibited. GPLv2~\S4 says that if you undertake any of
+redistribution.  By default, all other types of copying, modification, and
+redistribution are prohibited.  GPLv2~\S4 says that if you undertake any of
 those other types (e.g., redistributing binary-only in violation of GPLv2~\S3),
 then all rights under the license --- even those otherwise permitted for
 those who have not violated --- terminate automatically.
 
-GPLv2~\S4 gives GPLv2 teeth. If licensees fail to adhere to the license, then
-they are stuck. They must completely cease and desist from all
-copying, modification and distribution of that GPL'd software.
+GPLv2~\S4 makes GPLv2 enforceable.  If licensees fail to adhere to the
+license, then they are stuck without any permission under to engage in
+activities covered by copyright law.  They must completely cease and desist
+from all copying, modification and distribution of the GPL'd software.
 
-At that point, violating licensees must gain the forgiveness of the
-copyright holder to have their rights restored. Alternatively, they could
+At that point, violating licensees must gain the forgiveness of the copyright
+holders to have their rights restored.  Alternatively, the violators could
 negotiate another agreement, separate from GPL, with the copyright
-holder. Both are common practice.
+holder.  Both are common practice.
 
 At FSF, it is part of the mission to spread software freedom. When FSF
 enforces GPL, the goal is to bring the violator back into compliance as
