<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
* Ciaran O'Riordan wrote, On 21/11/07 12:28:
<blockquote cite="mid:9labp793zq.fsf@vorcha.compsoc.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Sam Liddicott <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sam@liddicott.com"><sam@liddicott.com></a> writes:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">And therefore you can't mix GPL with AGPL; because if you move to AGPL you
add additional requirements to the GPL'd code which is forbidden by the
GPL.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Section 13 of GPLv3 prevents this problem:
13. Use with the GNU Affero General Public License.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have permission
to link or combine any covered work with a work licensed under version 3
of the GNU Affero General Public License into a single combined work, and
to convey the resulting work. The terms of this License will continue to
apply to the part which is the covered work, but the special requirements
of the GNU Affero General Public License, section 13, concerning
interaction through a network will apply to the combination as such.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I am now against GPL3 because others may promote enhancements to my
work as AGPL thus deterring me from benefiting from the enhancements as
I often won't always want to meet the burden of the AGPL.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:9labp793zq.fsf@vorcha.compsoc.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap=""></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">[...] the GFDL mess.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
The upcoming version of the GFDL is still being drafted. Please submit
comments - including negative ones there (in addition to here, if you like;
I'm not trying to push criticism off this list).
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://gplv3.fsf.org/doclic-dd1-guide.html">http://gplv3.fsf.org/doclic-dd1-guide.html</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
Thanks for the tip.<br>
<br>
I'm against the old invariant clause as it can be used to permit others
to add obnoxious texts to enhancements of my work, in a way such that
the obnoxious text deters me from using the enhanced work; thus they
effectively (in my eyes) add restrictions to prevent me distributing
the new work. <br>
<br>
I do not know if the new GFDL has such a clause.<br>
<br>
Whether or not these various licenses are good, what is clear is that
FSF has gone beyond the bounds of the problem that united everyone, and
as members splinter it finds that those members (as Basho encourages)
were following the principles of the FSF, not the FSF itself.<br>
<br>
GPL2 served me. GPL3 opposes me. I don't mind it serving someone else,
lets see how many of those it serves decide to pay subscriptions to the
FSF.<br>
<br>
Sam<br>
</body>
</html>