Two GPL Questions

[Kenny Tilton]

I was about to release some new stuff of mine under the GNU GPL when I
noticed something. Not sure of its implications. Any insight
appreciated:

"9. The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions
of the General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will
be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to
address new problems or concerns. 

Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program
specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any
later version", you have the option of following the terms and
conditions either of that version or of any later version published by
the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version
number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the
Free Software Foundation."

Well, I just noticed that this clause is not all-encompassing. Not
mentioned is the case where the Program specifies a version number
/without/ adding allowance for "any later version".

Anyway, i would find it strange to give the FSF the option effectively
to change the licensing of my stuff at any point in the future by
producing a new version of the GPL. I understand the impetus, viz, to
have all GPL code consistently licensed now and in the future, but the
price paid is to give FSF control over the licensing of all GPLed code,
and I thought control was one of the cardinal sins. Well, whadoiknow,
these issues are all new to me.

Well, maybe I can live with #9 if I carefully handle the cross-reference
from my source to the GPL by restricting it to one version. Otherwise,
my second problem was with the GNU GPL itself being copyrighted and not
allowing modifications, which I assume means I cannot use it to make my
own license revised as I like.

The funny thing is, when I looked at all the other licenses approved by
the FSF, the only one I saw with a copyleft was the GNU GPL. So here I
am ready to be a second GNU GPL-compatible copyleft license, but I
cannot use the GNU GPL as a head start, I have to find uncopyrighted
licenses, break open my book on Software licensing, etc etc.

What exactly does it do for FSF to lock up the GNU GPL that way? Sounds
again like control, tho in this case it is more just an inconvenience to
draw up a license without being able to use GGPL language.

TIA for any insights on these issues.

kenny
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3