Ofcourse, I forgot to attach the diff.
@@ -311,9 +311,14 @@ distribute the package, and the standing
status in court if necessary.
GNU packages need not be FSF-copyrighted; this is up to the author(s),
-generally at the time the package is dubbed GNU@. When copyright is
-assigned to the FSF, the FSF can act to stop GPL violations about the
-package. Otherwise, legal actions are up to the author(s). The rest
+generally at the time the package is dubbed GNU@. When copyright is
+assigned to the FSF, the FSF has authority to act to stop GPL
+violations about the package (otherwise, legal actions are up to the
+author(s)). It also allows the FSF to grant additional permissions on a
+package, such as an exception, if the need should arise. Additionally,
+holding the copyright allows the FSF to upgrade the license of a package
+even if it had been initially released under "GPLv2 only" (instead of
+the "or later" licensing option as recommended by the FSF). The rest
of this section is about the case when a package is FSF-copyrighted.
@emph{Before} incorporating significant changes, make sure that the
