GPL License with clause for Web use?

simo simo.sorce at
Wed Nov 21 17:58:35 UTC 2007

On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 15:34 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> simo <simo.sorce at> wrote: [...]
> > True you can combine the GPLv3 work with AGPLv3, so what? You can't
> > "relicense" under AGPL, you can only combine works. It means you need an
> > existing work under the GPLv3 and and existing one under the AGPL. [...]
> Erm, you can take an existing work under the GPLv3 and combine it with
> a new one under the AGPLv3, can't you?
> /me checks
> Yep, nothing seems to limit clause 13 to an *existing* work.
> Did I miss something?
> By the way, the GPLv3 AGPL-friendly clause is only friendly to AGPLv3,
> so what happens when AGPLv4 or AGPLv3.1 comes out?  Oops?

I guess that is on purpose, and I don't think we will ever see AGPLv3.x
before GPLv3.x as they are in essence the same license with an added
requirement. If you use GPLv3 only, then ooops, you are in the same
troubles GPLv2 only people are now wrt GPLv3, nothing can be done about
that, license compatibility between strong copylef licenses can be
achieved only by explicit permission and that has to be put into the new
*and* the old license. That's why the FSF promotes the "or later"
clause, just because it makes it easier to upgrade if you want later,
without the need to re-license. If you keep strict ownership of the work
you don;t have this problem of course.
Others will as they will have to beg you to make your stuff compatible
with the new version, but this is the nature of copyright, nothing that
can be solve in a license (except by dropping copyleft and being just


More information about the Discussion mailing list