* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, On 22/11/07 13:36: > Am Thursday, dem 22. Nov 2007 schrieb Sam Liddicott: > > >> With the GPL3 this is not true: at some time in the distribution chain, >> derived works may have certain additional restrictions added, thus >> licensing the combined work under the AGPL such that when an original >> contributor receives the derived work with enhancements to his own work, >> he may not distribute any combination of his work with any of those >> enhancements unless he does so with the additional restrictions of the >> AGPL. >> >> If the licensor finds this disparity objectionable then he may prefer to >> use the GPL2. >> >> I believe that this implication is not widely understood and because >> ealier versions of the GPL are widely known to prohibit the addition of >> extra restrictions, this implication is also unexpected. >> > > Oh, that is anything but unexpected for someone, who followed the > drafting process. > Section 7 of GPLv3 allowed some additional restrictions right from > draft 1. Actually those additional restrictions were softened later. > GPL3, Section 7, optional terms a-f are nothing like the extra restriction of the AGPL.
The extra restrictions of the AGPL are part of the AGPL alone, and as far I as I can see, GPL3 makes no explicit recognition that such terms could be permanent according to the GPL3. GPL3, 10 says: "If the Program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is governed by this License along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term." However, I guess, removal of that AGPL term is without effect if the work stays combined with the AGPL work, or rather, would breach the AGPL. Sam
_______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
