I was about to release some new stuff of mine under the GNU GPL when I noticed something. Not sure of its implications. Any insight appreciated:
"9. The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of the General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns. Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation." Well, I just noticed that this clause is not all-encompassing. Not mentioned is the case where the Program specifies a version number /without/ adding allowance for "any later version". Anyway, i would find it strange to give the FSF the option effectively to change the licensing of my stuff at any point in the future by producing a new version of the GPL. I understand the impetus, viz, to have all GPL code consistently licensed now and in the future, but the price paid is to give FSF control over the licensing of all GPLed code, and I thought control was one of the cardinal sins. Well, whadoiknow, these issues are all new to me. Well, maybe I can live with #9 if I carefully handle the cross-reference from my source to the GPL by restricting it to one version. Otherwise, my second problem was with the GNU GPL itself being copyrighted and not allowing modifications, which I assume means I cannot use it to make my own license revised as I like. The funny thing is, when I looked at all the other licenses approved by the FSF, the only one I saw with a copyleft was the GNU GPL. So here I am ready to be a second GNU GPL-compatible copyleft license, but I cannot use the GNU GPL as a head start, I have to find uncopyrighted licenses, break open my book on Software licensing, etc etc. What exactly does it do for FSF to lock up the GNU GPL that way? Sounds again like control, tho in this case it is more just an inconvenience to draw up a license without being able to use GGPL language. TIA for any insights on these issues. kenny -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3