Re: [glob2-devel] Version 3 of GPL license issued yesterday

[Martin Voelkle]

On 7/5/07, Cyrille Dunant <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > You might want to check on the GNU's project site, then :)
> >
> > I can't find anything on upgrading (or not being able to upgrade) the
> > "or any later version" clause. Do you have any pointers?
> >
> Quoth the FSF:
>
> Q: "Why should programs say "Version 2 of the GPL or any later version"?"
>
> A: [...]
>
>  Suppose a program says "Version 2 of the GPL or any later version" and a new
> version of the GPL is released. If the new GPL version gives additional
> permission, that permission will be available immediately to all the users of
> the program. But if the new GPL version has a tighter requirement [this is
> the case of v3], it will not restrict use of the current version of the
> program, because it can still be used under GPL version 2. When a program
> says "Version 2 of the GPL or any later version", users will always be
> permitted to use it, and even change it, according to the terms of GPL
> version 2--even after later versions of the GPL are available.
>
>  If a tighter requirement in a new version of the GPL need not be obeyed for
> existing software, how is it useful? Once GPL version 3 is available, the
> developers of most GPL-covered programs will release subsequent versions of
> their programs specifying "Version 3 of the GPL or any later version". Then
> users will have to follow the tighter requirements in GPL version 3, for
> subsequent versions of the program.
>
> [...]

It's not clear to me whether these developers must hold the copyright
of the original work in order to license a copy under v3 or later. Of
course it would not change the v2 or later of the original work.

Brett Smith (from FSF) states it more clearly:
It definitely should be possible, however. There are lots of good
reasons to upgrade to GPLv3, and we'll be happy to do what we can to
help projects that are interested in making the switch. Licenses
aren't designed to be permanent, so it's important to have some kind
of structure to make upgrades easy. The FSF has collected copyright
assignments to do this for GNU programs, and the SFLC has been helping
developers establish other ways to achieve this goal.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070501092619462

So you need copyright indeed.

> Me:
> note that if your future contributions are GPL v3, this does not make all the
> previous contributions v3. They stay v2

Sure, but the combined work (i.e. the new version that incorporates
the contribution) is only available as v3.

> v2 and v3 are incompatible ('tis is what the FSF says, and it is reasonable) ,
> and the "or above" which makes them compatible is illegal at least in
> Switzerland, thus, to relicense the code as v3 or above, you _need_ the
> permission of the authors.

Very interesting. Do you have a public source for the interpretation
of GPL in Switzerland?

Martin