On Sat, 15 Aug 1998, Philip Hands wrote: > > You have heard incorrectly. The GPL comes with this immutable > > license: > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE > > Version 2, June 1991 > > > > Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > > 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 > > USA > > Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies > > of this license document, but changing it is not allowed. > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Right, but if it came with a licence like this: > > ______________________________________________________________________ > GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE > Version <mumble>, June <mumble> > > Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA > This licence is covered by the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE. > ______________________________________________________________________ > > We might understand what was going on (being well versed in recursion) but > most of the legal profession would probably start giggling hysterically, and > have to go for a lie down to recover. > > It really doesn't matter how ``right'' a recursive license might seem to us, > if the result is something that is unenforcible, because the lawyers don't > understand it.
But it doesn't need to be that complex. The GPL doesn't need to be under copyleft, just a sensible copyright. IMHO, the GPL should simply say 'Anyone may freely distribute verbatim copies of this document, as well as derived works, as long as any derived license clearly indicates its heritage, and also indicates that it is unaffiliated with the GPL'. Or something like that. RMS has been heard to say something (this came up on -devel or -policy shortly after I became a maintainer, a month or two ago) claiming that you can copy any pieces of legal text. Marcus has promised to post here shortly explaining that, I think. My step-father is a lawyer, in the UK, and he says that there is no special exclusion for copyright on licenses - i.e. licenses can be copyrighted, and that copyright is enforceable. I'll speak to him again about it, but that was definitely the story last time I asked.. Jules /----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd | | Jules aka | | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TW9 2TF *UK* | +----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \----------------------------------------------------------------------/
