When to evaluate dual licenses (was: license categories, was: I'm not supposed to use the ECL v2?)

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

John Cowan wrote:
> Arnoud Engelfriet scripsit:
>> It would be most peculiar if the recipient could then receive a GPLv3
>> license to the work from the copyright holder and use its section 3
>> against the distributor, who explicitly refused to accept GPLv3.

>Hard cheese for him.  The buyer gets both a GPLv2 and a GPLv3 license
>for that part of the code directly from the author without further action
>on anybody's part.

What?  That can't be right.  If it is GPL2 or later and you as developer explicitly
choose GPL v2 then GPL v2 it is for the entire work you distribute.  The original 
code can be gotten as either V2, V3, V4, Vn but the distributed derivative 
version is V2.
 
The distributor's code is GPL V2 Only in this scenario.  Which is compatible 
for GPL V2 and later code.  The project as a whole is not GPL V3 or GPL 
V3 or later compatible according to the FSF compatibility chart because
there is a GPL V2 only component within it.
 
At no point do you get the distributor's code or entire work under GPL V3
so you can't invoke any V3 restrictions against that distributor.
 
IANAL, etc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20071204/4340cb03/attachment.html>