For Approval: GPLv3

[Matthew Flaschen]

Chris Travers wrote:
> Hence this is a matter of form, not
> substance relatng to the actual permissions granted to the recipient of
> the software.

It's a matter of form until modifications are made.  However, the
permission notice isn't usually removed.  There's just a note by the
distributor/modifier that it's no longer meant to apply.

> 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?

If the distributor doesn't modify the code, only the original
permissions by the author are relevant.

> The question becomes, however, does this mean that it is still the same
> contract and that agreement creates a contract?

Again, the public license from original author to end user still exists.

Matt Flaschen