On Jul 14, 2007, Michael Eager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Krzysztof Halasa wrote: >> Michael Eager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Unfortunately, as I understand it, this is not the case. If you >>> apply a GPLv3 patch to a previously GPLv2 branch after August 1, then >>> this entire branch, and all files in it, magically and silently >>> becomes GPLv3. (This is unless FSF agrees with Mark's proposal >>> to dual license patches.) >> I hope the COPYING or similar file will contain the licence text >> under which the code is distributed? > Not until someone updates the txt. Which should happen quickly, > but if someone applies a GPLv3 patch to a previously GPLv2 branch, > the entire branch becomes GPLv3, whether the COPYING file was > updated or not. And distributing a program (be it a file or a huge collection of files) under GPLv3 without a copy of GPLv3 would amount to copyright infringement, should the distribution be performed by anyone but the copyright holder. IANAL. 4. [...] provided that you [...] give all recipients a copy of this License along with the Program. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED], gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist [EMAIL PROTECTED], gnu.org}
