For Approval: GPLv3

[Matthew Flaschen]

Chris Travers wrote:

> However, in the GPLv2, you had a license whose basic contractual
> relationship was clearly based in established copyright law.  Subsequent
> Supreme Court rulings may have changed the scope of the license, but it is
> pretty hard to argue that it isn't based in the law.

GPLv3 is still clearly based on copyright law.  If it wasn't, it would
have no bearing on the exercise of copyright rights.  That would mean it
wouldn't be able to grant you the right to copy, modify, distribute, etc.
> My argument against the GPLv3 however is basically that it creates what are
> probably unprecidented procedures in contracts for third parties to affect
> the form and/or substance of those contracts.

Who are you considering a third party?

Matt Flaschen