IANAL, TINLA. Consult with a professional familiar with your situation.
Scott James Remnant said:
> 4. Request the patch from the revision containing the licence change to
> the HEAD.
>
> a. This patch should not include any licence changes.
This patch is derived from the work under the new license.
(Hmm... Wouldn't this patch have to include the invariant sections?)
> 5. Apply this patch to your documentation file(s).
>
>
> You now have a copy of the latest upstream documentation under the
> original DFSG-free licence, and entirely legally too.
You have a work, with the same text as the work upstream has published under
the new license. The identical work is probably not "independantly
created"[0]. It would be hard to argue that it should not be licensed under
the terms of the upstream's new work.
At best, you have a work which is a result of combining two or three works:
The document v1.0
The patch v1.0->v1.1
The document v1.1
In order to distribute the combined work, you would have to fulfil the terms
of each license. This means carrying the invariant sections required by
v1.1.
--Joe
[0] cf. the subthread about independant creation under the SunRPC is {not,}
free thread.
