On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 12:46 +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
- simo simo.sorce@xsec.it [071129 23:52]:
Basically, Richard thinks that the "linked or combined" language does not imply modification. IE, releasing a patch against the GPLv3 part of the work under AGPLv3 would even be a copyright violation. The patch needs to be GPLv3. Only the combination of the works obeys to AGPLv3's additional requirements. But each piece retains completely its license.
Therefore there is no risk that a GPLv3 work can be effectively turned into an AGPLv3 work by means of patches.
But even if this holds, someone could still patch the GPLv3 work to a state where it no longer works alone, and then linking it with a AGPLv3 code having the missing pieces for it to work, couldn't they?
I too think there are probably some pathological cases where it will be difficult to understand the boundaries, or where a patch to the GPLv3 side even if GPLv3ed will not really be much of use without the AGPLv3 part. I guess that's inevitable but I think it will not be as dangerous as permitting an AGPLv3 patch to a GPLv3 work.
Simo.