So Richard does that put you in the camp that says the installation information requirement also exists in GPLv2? That's one area where I could see v2 & v3 having different enforcement options.
Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 18, 2014, at 1:36 PM, "Richard Fontana" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:18:48PM +0200, Marc Dietrich wrote: >> Am Mittwoch 16 April 2014, 19:08:18 schrieb Bradley M. Kuhn: > >>> I'm sorry that this thread has been so distracting on this issue. The goal >>> of the GPL is to give certain freedoms to end-users, indeed. However, the >>> primary legal mechanism it uses underneath is copyright, and as such the >>> most traditional way and more or less the only successful way so far the >>> license has been enforced has been through copyright holders acting on >>> their rights. Take a look at GPLv2 Section 4 for the central provision on >>> how this works. You also might want to read the book I wrote much of it and >>> am the primary editor of: >>> http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn/articles/comprehensive-gpl-guide.pdf >> >> I'm sorry that I'm likely not motivated enough to read through all this. But >> maybe just a small question you may have an answer to (sorry, I'm again too >> lazy to google it myself). Does the GPLv3 helps with with problem? > > You mean does GPLv3 address the issue I believe you are raising, which > is the presumed reservation of an enforcement remedy for a GPLv2 > violation in the copyright holder? No, it doesn't. The interpretation > of GPLv2 and GPLv3 should be in harmony in this respect. Thus if > there's some theory under which one could argue that a downstream > licensee has a legal remedy against a GPL-violating distributor, it > should apply equally to GPLv2 and GPLv3. If there's some theory why > this should *not* be possible, it should apply equally to GPLv2 and > GPLv3. > > Also, don't misunderstand me -- this is not *inherent* to the GPL as > some sort of abstract thing. I can envision various ways in which a > hypothetical GNU GPLv4 could be drafted to make weak or strong > attempts to ensure that downstream users have legal remedies to > enforce the source code requirements of the GPL. These might come at a > cost which might be seen as undesirable. But that's for the FSF of the > future to decide. > > > - Richard > >
