For Approval: GPLv3

Chris Travers chris at
Sat Aug 25 18:24:01 UTC 2007

Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> "Alexander Terekhov" <alexander.terekhov at> writes:
> I'm sorry, but this seems like nonsense to me.

As much as I share Alexander's opinions in other areas, I would agree.

My issues of copyright misuse concern the fact that the GPL v3 
*requires* programmers to cede the rights to grant additional global 
permissions to their works, effectively forcing programmers to grant an 
ability to drop additional permissions to anyone who merely distributes 
the software.  It furthermore *requires* that programmers grant 
distributors the *right* to restrict third party copyrights.  Note that 
no copyrights are obtained that I know of (IANAL) by merely conveying 
the software (and mere conveyance is all that is required to relicense 
under the GPL v3),  Clauses in question are:

1)  Section 6 opening paragraph (requirements on distributing 
Corresponding Source including source for all dynamically linked 
libraries as a whole under the same licnese)

2)  Section 7 definitions of additional terms, additional permissions, 
further restrictions, and an ability to remove any such permissions and 
restrictions beyond those granted in the GPL v3 itself.

As a developer (IANAL), the issue that concerns me is as follows:

1)  I distribute a new and cool application under the GPL v3.
2)  MagaComp Software Systems Inc. (fictional software vendor), takes my 
code and uses it to make their next closed-source proprietary application.
3)  I sue for copyright infringement.
4)  They prevail on a copyright misuse defense, and everyone who has 
released code under the GPL v3 now finds the *restrictions* unenforceable.
5)  Every other proprietary software company helps themselves to open 
source code....

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: chris.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 171 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list