CVSROOT: /webcvs/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Richard M. Stallman <rms> 11/08/12 13:54:10
Modified files:
licenses : license-list.html
Log message:
Explain EUPL compatibility pathway.
Suggest response to "let's use a Creative Commons license".
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/licenses/license-list.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.290&r2=1.291
Patches:
Index: license-list.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/licenses/license-list.html,v
retrieving revision 1.290
retrieving revision 1.291
diff -u -b -r1.290 -r1.291
--- license-list.html 13 Jul 2011 17:29:57 -0000 1.290
+++ license-list.html 12 Aug 2011 13:53:48 -0000 1.291
@@ -814,19 +814,29 @@
Public License (EUPL) version 1.1</a></dt>
<dd><p>This is a free software license. By itself, it has a copyleft
-comparable to the GPL's. However, it allows recipients to distribute
-the work under the terms of other selected licenses, and some of
-those—the <a href="#EPL">Eclipse Public License</a> and the <a
-href="#CommonPublicLicense10">Common Public License</a> in
-particular—only provide a weaker copyleft. Thus, developers
-can't rely on this license to provide a strong copyleft.</p>
-
-<p>The EUPL is compatible with GPLv2, because that is listed as one of
-the alternative licenses that recipients may use. However, it is
-incompatible with GPLv3, because recipients are not given permission to
-use GPLv3's terms, and the EUPL's copyleft conflicts with GPLv3's.
-Because of this incompatibility, we urge you not to use the EUPL for any
-software you write.</p></dd>
+comparable to the GPL's, and incompatible with it. However, it gives
+recipients ways to relicense the work under the terms of other
+selected licenses, and some of those—the <a href="#EPL">Eclipse
+Public License</a> and the <a href="#CommonPublicLicense10">Common
+Public License</a> in particular—only provide a weaker copyleft.
+Thus, developers can't rely on this license to provide a strong
+copyleft.</p>
+
+<p>The EUPL allows relicensing to GPLv2, because that is listed as one
+of the alternative licenses that users may convert to. It also,
+indirectly, allows relicensing to GPL version 3, because there is a
+way to relicense to the CeCILL v2, and the CeCILL v2 gives a way to
+relicense to any version of the GNU GPL.
+
+To do this two-step relicensing, you need to first write a piece of
+code which you can license under the CeCILL v2, or find a
+suitable module already available that way, and add it to the
+program. Adding that code to the EUPL-covered program provides
+grounds relicense it to the CeCILL v2. Then your need to write a
+piece of code which you can license under the GPL v3+, or find a
+suitable module already available that way, and add it to the program.
+Adding that code to the CeCILL-covered program provides grounds to
+relicense it to GPL v3+.</p></dd>
<dt><a id="IBMPL" href="http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ibmpl.php";>
IBM Public License, Version 1.0</a></dt>
@@ -1641,14 +1651,15 @@
software or documentation, since it is incompatible with the GNU GPL
and with the GNU FDL.</p>
-<p id="which-cc">Creative Commons publishes many licenses which
-are very different. Therefore, to say that a work “uses a
-Creative Commons license” is to leave the principal questions
-about the work's licensing unanswered. When you see such a statement
-in a work, please ask the author to highlight the substance of the
-license choices. And if someone proposes to “use a Creative
-Commons license” for a certain work, it is vital to ask
-immediately, “Which one?”</p>
+<p id="which-cc">Creative Commons publishes many licenses which are
+very different. Therefore, to say that a work “uses a Creative
+Commons license” is to leave the principal questions about the
+work's licensing unanswered. When you see such a statement in a work,
+please ask the author to change the work to state clearly and
+visibly <em>which</em>of the Creative Commons license it uses. And if
+someone proposes to “use a Creative Commons license” for a
+certain work, it is vital to ask “Which Creative Commons
+license?” before proceeding any further.</p>
</dd>
<dt><a id="ccbysa"
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/legalcode";>
@@ -1804,7 +1815,7 @@
<p>
Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
- $Date: 2011/07/13 17:29:57 $
+ $Date: 2011/08/12 13:53:48 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
