>> "version 2 or higher" > That phrase exists outside the license
That's true. But sec. 9 of the GPLv2 says: If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation. So, by making the COPYING contain the v2 text, is the author specifying a particular version? If yes, then the sec. 9 provision would be meaningless, since there would be no way to not specify a version number. My understanding is that courts would presume that a license term has a meaning, if it has a plausible reading. And there such a reading: that to specify a version, there needs to be (e.g. in the source files) a statement like, "This file [or work] is licensed under the GNU GPLv2." Corrections, flames, etc. are welcome. -Sanjoy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/