Martin Vermeer wrote: > On Sat, 2005-03-19 at 08:49, Andre Poenitz wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 11:34:28AM +0000, Angus Leeming wrote: >> > flags them as different but I really don't care too much. I'm much >> > more interested in getting Poenitz on board ;-) >> >> And I am still interested why I should sign not just GPL v2 (which is >> just fine) but also any following version including the one that says >> that FooBar Inc owns all my code. > > For convenience.
Even less excitingly, because the current LyX licence is "GPL v2 or later". We're not trying to change the licence, we're just bullet proofing the desire to remove the XForms exception. > When a new GPL comes out and it is significantly better > than the old one, it can be used straightaway without asking anybody > again. > > If push comes to shove and the FSF goes "evil", it is still us that do > the releasing. Yes, FooBar Inc could release their own rip-off of LyX > under GPL v666, but it wouldn't remain the mainstream version for long. Incidentally, does the FSF not own the Gnu and GPL trademarks? Ie FooBar Inc would be breaking trademark rules by releasing GPL v666. -- Angus
