Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Mar 2007 21:02 UTC, submitted by Ali Davoodifar
GNU, GPL, Open Source The FSF has released the third draft of the revised third version of the GNU General Public License. Some of the changes in the new draft, such as the increased clarification and legal language, or the housekeeping changes that reflect new aspects of the license are likely to be accepted. However, the license also includes a new approach to the controversial issue of lock-down technologies as well as more explicit language about patents, including language designed to prevent a re-occurrence of agreements such as the one that Novell entered into with Microsoft - all of which is apt to kindle heated debate as the revision process enters its final stages after fifteen months of intensive work.
Thread beginning with comment 225526
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Oh dear...
by butters on Thu 29th Mar 2007 03:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Oh dear..."
Member since:

"Yes, Your Honor, but I didn't actually read the license" doesn't hold up in court. The GPLv3 is significantly shorter than many other software licenses, like the EULA for MS Windows Vista, for example. Vendors, developers, and CIOs will read it and/or consult their lawyers. Mom and Pop might not, but who's gunna sue them? The RIAA doesn't have any jurisdiction here.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Oh dear...
by PRaabjerg on Thu 29th Mar 2007 06:05 in reply to "RE[2]: Oh dear..."
PRaabjerg Member since:

Also, if you know the basic rules/the philosophy of the GPL, it actually becomes very difficult for the layman to break it unintentionally. As opposed to a standard EULA.
Anyone who simply modifies and republishes code should still just remember that they need to publish the source along with it.

The execution may be a bit more legally explicit, but in the end, most people don't have to do any extra work to comply with the licence, compared to v2. As I understand it, i's even a lot more forgiving to accidental license breakers than v2 was. You get 30 days to comply, from the date you are made aware of it.
v2 just stopped functioning instantly, and you would have to ask the copyright holder for permission again.

Reply Parent Score: 3