Questions / Concepts GPL. Was: Re: GPL License with clause for Web use?

[Sam Liddicott]

simo wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 23:03 +0100, Carsten Agger wrote:
>   
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Sam Liddicott wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Sorry for top quoting (darn pocket outlook, roll-on neo 1973)
>>>
>>> Your scenario is nearly right.
>>>
>>> What if the same person adds features to gcc   as well.
>>>
>>> Are those features AGPL or GPL as gcc is gpl.
>>> I want then to be gpl, I think they would be AGPl.
>>>       
>> Well, since the features added would be part of the work for which the
>> GPLv3 "will continue to apply", they will be GPLv3.
>>
>> Any changes which can be isolated to a part covered by the GPLv3 will be
>> GPLv3. Only such changes as apply to the parts covered by the AGPL or
>> the work as a whole (i.e., glue connecting the two parts) will be AGPL.
>>
>> At least that's how I read it.
>>     
>
> This is how I read it too so far.
>   
It's how I read the AGPL - except the GPL3/13 allows conversion of the 
GPL3 work to AGPL in which case the modifications could be AGPL.

It seems to me that GPL3/13 that gives authority to do this, not AGP - 
if the recipient chooses to act on that authority and do so.

However, a summary of points will be collated on Monday for a request of 
official clarification as per Shane's suggestion.

I enjoyed the discussion, anyway... even though I got a little 
overheated, so thanks all, for being so frank so that we could 
understand each-others concerns and understandings.

Sam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20071124/1718c2ae/attachment.html>