On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 at 03:44:18 -0500, Ryan C. Gordon wrote:
> my fast reading says "you can add
> boilerplate of the following types to the license" (disclaimer of
> warranty, etc), and I _think_ Zenimax's additions are allowed under
> this clause.
I believe those clauses in the GPLv3 were intended to make it crystal-clear
that you're allowed to combine New-BSD/MIT-licensed code (which has a mandatory
license boilerplate / disclaimer of warranty) with GPL code. In practice
everyone did that anyway.
If the Zenimax clauses fit the conditions in the GPLv3 (I haven't checked)...
> Is the thinking that this is GPL2-compatible because the license
> says "GPL2 or later"?
... then this still isn't GPLv2-compatible, but it is ioquake3-compatible,
because ioquake3 is licensed under GPLv2 *or later*.
It'd be a decision for the ioquake3 maintainer whether to allow GPLv3+ code
into the "official" ioquake3 source tree (which would result in ioquake3
*source* being mostly GPLv2+ but partially GPLv3+, and hence ioquake3
*binaries* being the intersection of those licenses, i.e. GPLv3+).
Similarly, for a fork (e.g. TurtleArena) it's up to the fork's maintainer
whether they want to allow GPLv3 code or not.
(I'd misunderstood the Wolfenstein games as being GPLv3; they're actually
GPLv3+, judging by the header in enemyterritory/src/qcommon/common.c; that
doesn't mean anything practical yet, but means that if there's a GPLv4 in
future, we can combine ioquake3 and enemyterritory code with GPLv4 code.)
Simon
_______________________________________________
ioquake3 mailing list
ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org
http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org
By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl.
