Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Should we allow "GPL, v2 or later" for ebuilds?
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:42:45
Message-Id: 20200204134229.53b9df85@katipo2.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Should we allow "GPL, v2 or later" for ebuilds? by Rich Freeman
1 On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 08:19:08 -0500
2 Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote:
4 > Really the main threat (IMO) is that the code could be de-copylefted.
5 > They could make GPL v4 a copy of the BSD license, and now anything
6 > that was v2+ is effectively BSD and can be used in non-FOSS software
7 > without issue. I guess that isn't any worse than the previous case of
8 > it instead being merged into some other v4 variant that you can access
9 > the source for but prefer to avoid because of something else in the
10 > license, except now you might not see the code at all.
12 Its like we need some sort of statement people can use that says
13 something to the effect of:
15 - GPL versions published after this release may be used, but contingent
16 on the author of this release verifying that newer GPL versions continue the
17 intended spirit of GPL2
19 The idea that my code might be later under some other terms of license
20 that I've never read is about as bad as somebody updating EULA/TOS
21 without informing anybody it changed.
23 Its *probably* fine, but I'd want to have opportunity to read those
24 before rubber stamping it.
26 As they say: Trust, but Verify.
28 GPL terms changing after an authors death should not really apply
29 retroactively to the dead authors code.