rhkra...@gmail.com writes: > […] I believe that the original author of a package could do something > like create further modifications to the code and create a non-free > version of the code.
Yes. The _Copyleft and the GNU General Public License_ guide <URL:https://copyleft.org/guide/> addresses that possibility: The GPL is irrevocable in the sense that once a copyright holder grants rights for someone to copy, modify and redistribute the software under terms of the GPL, they cannot later revoke that grant. Since the GPL has no provision allowing the copyright holder to take such a prerogative, the license is granted as long as the copyright remains in effect. The copyright holders have the right to relicense the same work under different licenses […], or to stop distributing the GPLv2’d version (assuming GPLv2 §3(b) was never used), but they may not revoke the rights under GPLv2 already granted. In fact, when an entity loses their right to copy, modify and distribute GPL’d software, it is because of their *own actions*, not that of the copyright holder. The copyright holder does not decide when GPLv2 §4 termination occurs (if ever); rather, the actions of the licensee determine that. <URL:https://copyleft.org/guide/comprehensive-gpl-guidech8.html#x11-510007.1> So, the copyright holders can make new releases without granting GPL freedoms. But they have no way to revoke the GPL freedoms already granted to a person in a specific past release of the work. -- \ “Fascism is capitalism plus murder.” —Upton Sinclair | `\ | _o__) | Ben Finney
