For Approval: GPLv3

[Chris Travers]

Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>
> If we interpret it as contract(s), I would suppose:
>
> Author forms contract with distributor, agreeing that distributor can
> distribute, modify, remove extra permissions, etc., provided conditions
> of GPL are met.
>   

Just so I understand your argument.  You seem to be suggesting that 
removing the form of the contract (what the stated permissions are) has 
no bearing on the rights granted by the contract (whatever GPL3 + 
whatever permissions I granted).  Hence this is a matter of form, not 
substance relatng to the actual permissions granted to the recipient of 
the software.

Rephrasing this, the actual permissions (what you can legally do with 
the software) are unchanged, but the notice of the permissions (the 
license) has changed.  Is this correct?

The question becomes, however, does this mean that it is still the same 
contract and that agreement creates a contract?  Or could this have the 
effect of voiding the GPL3 for downstream users on the basis that a 
contract no longer existed?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: chris.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 171 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20070831/b0d0c553/attachment.vcf>