On 08/30/2010 11:06 AM, John Smith wrote:
On 30 August 2010 20:03, Rob Myers<r...@robmyers.org> wrote:
The majority (> 50%) of GPL projects are now GPL 3. Which is hardly an
argument against allowing relicencing.
There is a little bit of a difference between changing versions that
are merely an extension of the existing license, than changing
licenses, that is going from GPL to BSD...
The part of my email that you didn't quote mentions that to some people,
GPL 3 was seen as a major change.
The GPL 3 was a major change in order to meet major changes in the
threats to free software. The meaning and requirements of distribution,
the nature of enforcement, what is covered by the licence, and the law
it is based on were all changed. But these changes were all to ensure
that the GPL does what it is intended to, they were changes in method
not intention.
The "or later version" licencing of most GPL 2 projects meant that the
change was possible where it was felt to be worthwhile. Which is now for
the majority of projects.
- Rob.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
