Rockbox.org home
release
dev builds
extras
themes manual
wiki
device status forums
mailing lists
IRC bugs
patches
dev guide



Rockbox mail archive

Subject: GPLv3

GPLv3

From: RafaŽl Carrť <rafael.carre_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2010 20:40:04 +0200

Just as an example I'm redistributing to all of you this file:

-------------------------CUT HERE-------------------------------
/***************************************************************************
 * __________ __ ___.
 * Open \______ \ ____ ____ | | _\_ |__ _______ ___
 * Source | _// _ \_/ ___\| |/ /| __ \ / _ \ \/ /
 * Jukebox | | ( <_> ) \___| < | \_\ ( <_> > < <
 * Firmware |____|_ /\____/ \___ >__|_ \|___ /\____/__/\_ \
 * \/ \/ \/ \/ \/
 * $Id$
 *
 * Copyright (C) 2003 Uwe Freese
 *
 * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
 * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
 * as published by the Free Software Foundation; version 3.
 *
 * This software is distributed on an "AS IS" basis, WITHOUT WARRANTY
   OF ANY
 * KIND, either express or implied.
 *
 ****************************************************************************/
#ifndef _ALARM_MENU_H
#define _ALARM_MENU_H

bool alarm_screen(void);

#endif
-------------------------CUT HERE-------------------------------

Since the original file (apps/alarm_menu.h) says I can redistribute
under the terms of GPLv2 or at my option any later version, I chose
version 3.

Now if you want to redistribute a work based on this file, you are free
to use my GPLv3-only version, or the less restrictive, GPLv2+ original
version from svn.rockbox.org

The GPL applies when a redistribution happens, so if someone takes
GPLv2+ code, and LGPLv3 code to make a binary, he can only redistribute
it under GPLv3 terms.

As GPL require he has to give the source code under the same licence
(GPLv3) if someone requests it.

In practice nobody requests source code from free software projects,
but instead they get the source directly from tar.gz or VCS.

So in the unlikely event that someone requests the GPLv3 source code
used to make this GPLv3 binary, the original distributor can take all
the GPLv2+ files used to make the binary, convert them to GPLv3,
and give these files to the person who requested it.

And of course since this is a bit of work the distributor can ask for a
reasonable fee.

The important thing here: THE LICENCE OF FILES IN SVN DOES NOT CHANGE,
we can continue to use less restrictive "GPLv2+"

When we are redistributing mixed sources of GPLv2+, (L)GPLv3, BSD,
public domain etc.., the GPL virality is not involved since it's not a
derived work.

And of course, IANAL, and I'm a bit annoyed by all these licences
incompatibility.

The point I want to make is there: I think there is no problem into
using GPLv3 code, as long as it doesn't harm our freedom to use GPLv2+
code.

AFAIK the only thing which would prevent us from using GPLv3 code is
the presence of GPLv2-only code in rockbox, and there has been some
effort made to ensure there's none.

-- 
RafaŽl Carrť
Received on 2010-07-04

Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew
aaa