On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Clint Adams <cl...@debian.org> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 03:50:06AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote: >> Apart from the termination clause, the GPLv2 is far more concise, >> I don't see tivoization as a problem (it's the software I want to >> protect, not anyone's combination of it with hardware), nor do I care >> about compatibility with Apache 2.0 -- I do, however, care about >> compatibility with GPL v2, which GPL v3 isn't. > > So your doomsday scenario is that if you license something > GPLv2+, someone might fork and modify it to be GPLv3+,
I was under the impression that forks couldn't change licenses. Is the scenario which Clint describes (legally) possible? -mz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caolfk3uoxx+f0_ca9lwe-n6p50y-cb4gs683w6cvfqvydw4...@mail.gmail.com
