Well, my instincts don't seem bad...

Post #219,358 by ben_tilly 8/15/05 12:29:22 PM Reply	Well, my instincts don't seem bad... I asked Wendy Seltzer, whose reply was: \nI haven't encountered this particular GPL question before, but I\nimagine it must be solved as you predict, not through the paradox of\na notice clause changing the meaning and intent of the rest of the\nlicense. Most likely, section 1 would allow you to say for your new project\nProject Foo, Copyright (C) 2005\n This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify\n it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by\n the Free Software Foundation, version 2.\nProject Foo includes code from Project Bar, available at <URL>,\nlicensed under GPL v2 or later. Project Bar's original copyright\nnotices are as follows ...\n So there is some ambiguity, but the first impression of a good lawyer with extensive GPL experience (not legal advice, yada yada yada) matched mine. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #219,665 by ubernostrum 8/16/05 11:33:04 PM 8/16/05 11:36:32 PM Reply	Wait a minute. So she recommends that the derivative work be distributed v2 and only v2, in other words, that the work be pinned to v2, and this is a vindication of your position? \r\n\r\n Please tell me I'm just misinterpreting where this stands in the (now-enormous and hard to follow) thread. --\r\nYou cooin' with my bird? \r\n[link\|http://www.shtuff.us/\|shtuff] Edited by ubernostrum Aug. 16, 2005, 11:36:32 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #219,667 by altmann 8/17/05 12:11:52 AM Reply	Not quite. It was a followup to my assertion that one can't take a program license "GPLv2 or later" and modify and distribute it as "GPLv2 only" to downlevel recipients. Ben and the lawyer's opinion is that one can do that as long as one keeps the original copyright notice intact, thereby leaving the original code to be under "GPLv2 or later" and one's modifications to be explicitly under GPLv2 (think the later was part of your reasoning, please correct me if I'm wrong). Having read some other opinions on it I'm starting to gravitate to their side on that, but for some reason it doesn't "feel" right. Then my eyes glazed over and I found I didn't really care that much :) -- Chris Altmann
Post #219,668 by ben_tilly 8/17/05 12:36:15 AM Reply	You got it I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)

Welcome to IWETHEY!