[License-review] For Approval: GPL-3+-with-whonix-additional-terms - GPLv3 with improved, legal protections as per GNU GPL version 3 section 7

[Patrick Schleizer]

Bruce Perens:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 8:43 PM Richard Fontana <
> richard.fontana at opensource.org> wrote:
> 
>> I don't think OSI should be considering GPLv3 additional restrictions.
>>  ... OSI should generally defer to the FSF as to their legitimacy in
>> relation to GPLv3.
>>
> 
> We shouldn't create a special status for FSF which makes us deny
> consideration entirely, without doing so for all license creators.

> We can
> and should, however, protect FSF's trademarks and their authority in
> controlling the text of the version of the license that is *called *GPLv3.

> We should probably thus not consider this combination of two texts for
> approval without first removing the name of FSF and the name GPLv3 from the
> combination.

Generally a good idea but in this specific case, this might be beyond
the wishes expressed by FSF?

GPLv3 clause "7. Additional Terms." explicitly allows such combination.

GPL FAQ entry "Can I modify the GPL and make a modified license?" [1]

>      It is possible to make modified versions of the GPL, but it tends to have practical consequences.
> 
>     You can legally use the GPL terms (possibly modified) in another license provided that you call your license by another name and do not include the GPL preamble, and provided you modify the instructions-for-use at the end enough to make it clearly different in wording and not mention GNU (though the actual procedure you describe may be similar).
> 
>     If you want to use our preamble in a modified license, please write to <licensing at gnu.org> for permission. For this purpose we would want to check the actual license requirements to see if we approve of them.
> 
>     Although we will not raise legal objections to your making a modified license in this way, we hope you will think twice and not do it. Such a modified license is almost certainly incompatible with the GNU GPL, and that incompatibility blocks useful combinations of modules. The mere proliferation of different free software licenses is a burden in and of itself.
> 
>     Rather than modifying the GPL, please use the exception mechanism offered by GPL version 3.

So there's two mechanisms:
1) modifying the GPL,
2) exception mechanism offered by GPL version 3

When 1) modifying the GPL: remove preamble (or ask for permission),
remove GNU, remove FSF, instructions-for-use at the end enough to make
it clearly different in wording

1) modifying the GPL: doesn't apply here, not a modification.

2) exception mechanism offered by GPL version 3: The exception mechanism
was used in this submission. GPLv3 clause "7. Additional Terms." and the
GPL FAQ entry "Can I modify the GPL and make a modified license?" [1]
does not ask for removal of FSF, GPL, GNU, etc.

So removal of FSF and the name GPLv3 from the combination might be
beyond the wishes expressed by FSF in this case?

Kind regards,
Patrick

[1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ModifyGPL