<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=us-ascii" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
* <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:list@akfoerster.de">list@akfoerster.de</a> wrote, On 22/11/07 13:36:
<blockquote cite="mid:20071122133650.GA13934@castrophe.akfoerster.de"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Am Thursday, dem 22. Nov 2007 schrieb Sam Liddicott:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">With the GPL3 this is not true: at some time in the distribution chain,
derived works may have certain additional restrictions added, thus
licensing the combined work under the AGPL such that when an original
contributor receives the derived work with enhancements to his own work,
he may not distribute any combination of his work with any of those
enhancements unless he does so with the additional restrictions of the
AGPL.
If the licensor finds this disparity objectionable then he may prefer to
use the GPL2.
I believe that this implication is not widely understood and because
ealier versions of the GPL are widely known to prohibit the addition of
extra restrictions, this implication is also unexpected.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Oh, that is anything but unexpected for someone, who followed the
drafting process.
Section 7 of GPLv3 allowed some additional restrictions right from
draft 1. Actually those additional restrictions were softened later.
</pre>
</blockquote>
GPL3, Section 7, optional terms a-f are nothing like the extra
restriction of the AGPL.<br>
<br>
The extra restrictions of the AGPL are part of the AGPL alone, and as
far I as I can see, GPL3 makes no explicit recognition that such terms
could be permanent according to the GPL3.<br>
<br>
GPL3, 10 says: "If the Program as you
received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is
governed by this License along with a term that is a further
restriction, you may remove that term."<br>
<br>
However, I guess, removal of that AGPL term is without effect if the
work stays combined with the AGPL work, or rather, would breach the
AGPL.<br>
<br>
Sam<br>
</body>
</html>