GPLv3's secretive Additional Terms
andrew.wilson at intel.com
Sat Apr 24 00:20:28 UTC 2010
Chris Travers wrote:
> This would allow reasonable legal notices to be used to effect
> non-removable license grants (absent changes which address #2 above)
> for specific copyrighted portions, for example:
> "Copyright (C) 2010 Chris Travers. Licensed under the GNU General
> Public License (GPL) version 3 or, at your option any later version,
> with the additional permission granted to link, via this file, to
> OpenSSL, and the additional restriction to reproduce this copyright
> and permission notice in any subsequent version of the file."
Chris, I don't believe this language is GPLv3 compliant because of your
restriction requiring verbatim reproduction of your permission. Section 7 says
When you convey a copy of a covered work,
you may at your option remove any additional permissions
from that copy, or from any part of it.
which contradicts your restriction. Call me a literalist, but I think
"remove any additional permissions" means a downstream recipient may /remove/
permissions, not /add/ new restrictions which have the effect of countering
additional permissions in underlying code. That way lies madness.
A better formulation might be
Copyright (c) 2010 Chris Travers. Licensed under the GNU General Public
version 3 or, at your option, any later version.
Chris Travers grants you an additional permission under Section 7 of the
GNU General Public License, version 3, permitting you to link this
work with OpenSSL.
putting your additional permission out in the open where it can be stripped by
a downstream user so inclined.
Intel open source technology center
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
More information about the License-discuss