I may be way out of my depth here, but here goes anyway.... I've written and packaged eurospeak (www.karl.jorgensen.com/eurospeak), and I'd like to include a "eurospeakised" version of the GNU Public License (version 2).
But the GPL-2 does not allow for modifications of the license itself. It does allow modifications of the "program", but not the license. As far as I can see, my choices are: 1) Include the modified version of the GPL-2 and hope for the best. I feel the legality of this may be debatable, considering the first 4 lines of the GPL-2. 2) Include the eurospeak-ised version of the GPL-2, but call it something else. I presume that this will make the license a "derived work" of the GPL-2. Will that be legal? 3) Give up on eurospeak-ising the GPL-2 and include the "normal" GPL-2. I'll appreciate any input on this. On a related note: If my interpretation of the GPL-2 is correct, then the license itself does not follow the DFSG, as the license does not allow for modifications of itself. Surely I must be mistaken here, but where did I go wrong? -- Karl E. Jørgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.karl.jorgensen.com /"\ \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign x - Say NO to HTML in email / \ - Say NO to Word documents in email (and Macros!)
pgpmazLFlR7KP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
