GPLv3 Discussion Draft FAQ
GPLv3
This website is an archive. It was used for drafting and public consultation on GPLv3 and version 3 of other GNU licenses which were published in 2007. For up to date information, see
. For more information about this archive, see
Skip to content.
Contact
Advanced Search…
GPLv3
Sections
Comments
Wiki
Press
Support
Personal tools
You
are here:
GPLv3 Discussion Draft FAQ
License Drafts
Read GPLv3
Read LGPLv3
Read AGPLv3
Read and comment on the GFDL and GSFDL drafts
Support the license revision process
Discussion Committees
Press Information
Audio, Video and Text
GPLv3 Discussion Draft FAQ
Forgot your password?
Document Actions
GPLv3 Discussion Draft FAQ
by
brett
last modified
2007-06-26 12:54
Answers to common questions about the latest GPLv3 draft
Throughout the drafting process for GPLv3, we've noticed that certain questions have been common in
various different discussion forums. This page will provide more
information to help clear up some of the common points of confusion.
We'll keep adding questions to this list as they keep coming up. If you
think we're missing something, please
let us know
General questions about the text
How is GPLv3 compatible with other GNU licenses?
The various GNU licenses enjoy broad compatibility between each other. The
only time you may not be able to combine code under two of these licenses is when you
want to use code that's
only
under an older version of a license
with code that's under a newer version.
Below is a detailed compatibility matrix for various combinations of the
GNU licenses, to provide an easy-to-use reference for specific cases. It
assumes that someone else has written some software under one of these
licenses, and you want to somehow incorporate code from that into a project
that you're releasing (either your own original work, or a modified version
of someone else's GPLed software). Find the license for your own work in a
column at the top of the table, and the license for the other code in a row
on the left. The cell where they meet will tell you whether or not this
combination is permitted.
When we say "copy code," we mean just that: you're taking a section of
code from one source, with or without modification, and inserting it into
your own program, thus forming a work based on the first section of code.
"Use a library" means that you're not copying any source
directly, but instead interacting with it through linking, importing, or
other typical mechanisms that bind the sources together when you compile or
run the code.
Skip compatibility matrix
I want to release a project under:
GPLv2 only
GPLv2 or later
GPLv3 or later
LGPLv2.1 only
LGPLv2.1 or later
LGPLv3 or later
I want to copy code under:
GPLv2 only
OK
OK
[2]
NO
OK if you convert to GPLv2
[7]
OK if you convert to GPLv2
[7]
[2]
NO
GPLv2 or later
OK
[1]
OK
OK
OK if you convert to GPL
[7]
OK if you convert to GPL
[7]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[7]
GPLv3
NO
OK if you upgrade to GPLv3
[3]
OK
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[8]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[8]
[3]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[7]
LGPLv2.1
only
OK if you convert to GPLv2
[7]
OK if you convert to GPL
[7]
[2]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[8]
OK
OK
[6]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[8]
LGPLv2.1
or later
OK if you convert to GPLv2
[7]
[1]
OK if you convert to GPL
[7]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[7]
OK
[5]
OK
OK
LGPLv3
NO
OK if you upgrade and convert to GPLv3
[7]
[3]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[7]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[8]
OK if you upgrade to LGPLv3
[4]
OK
I want to use a library under:
GPLv2 only
OK
OK
[2]
NO
OK if you convert to GPLv2
[7]
OK if you convert to GPLv2
[7]
[2]
NO
GPLv2 or later
OK
[1]
OK
OK
OK if you convert to GPL
[7]
[1]
OK if you convert to GPL
[7]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[7]
GPLv3
NO
OK if you upgrade to GPLv3
[3]
OK
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[8]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[7]
[3]
OK if you convert to GPLv3
[7]
LGPLv2.1 only
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
LGPLv2.1 or later
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
LGPLv3
NO
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
Skip footnotes
You must follow the terms of GPLv2 when incorporating the code in this
case. You cannot take advantage of terms in later versions of the GPL.
If you do this, as long as the project contains the code released under
GPLv2 only, you will not be able to upgrade the project's license to GPLv3
or later.
If you have the ability to release the project under GPLv2 or any later
version, you can choose to release it under GPLv3 or any later
version—and once you do that, you'll be able to incorporate the code
released under GPLv3.
If you have the ability to release the project under LGPLv2.1 or any later
version, you can choose to release it under LGPLv3 or any later
version—and once you do that, you'll be able to incorporate the code
released under LGPLv3.
You must follow the terms of LGPLv2.1 when incorporating the code in this
case. You cannot take advantage of terms in later versions of the LGPL.
If you do this, as long as the project contains the code released under
LGPLv2.1 only, you will not be able to upgrade the project's license to
LGPLv3 or later.
Every version of the LGPL gives you permission to relicense the code under
the corresponding version (or any later version) of the GPL. If you can
switch the LGPLed code in this case to using the GPL instead, you can make
this combination.
Every version of the LGPL gives you permission to relicense the code under
the corresponding version, or any later version, of the GPL. In these
cases, you can combine the code if you migrate its license to GPLv3, and
use GPLv3 for your own work as well.
Section 6
Why do distributors only have to provide Installation Information for User Products?
Some companies effectively outsource their entire IT department
to another company. Computers and applications are installed in the
company's offices, but managed remotely by some service provider. In
some of these situations, the hardware is locked down; only the service
provider has the key, and the customers consider that to be a desirable
security feature.
We think it's unfortunate that people would be willing to give up
their freedom like this. But they should be able to fend for
themselves, and the market provides plenty of alternatives to these
services that would not lock them down. As a result, we have introduced
this compromise to the draft: distributors are only required to provide
Installation Information when they're distributing the software on a
User Product, where the customers' buying power is likely to be less
organized.
This is a compromise of strategy, and not our ideals. Given the
environment we live in today—where Digital Restrictions Management is
focused largely in consumer devices, and everyone, including large
companies, is becoming increasingly worried about the effects of DRM
thanks to recent developments like the release of Microsoft's Windows
Vista—we think that the proposed language will still provide us with
enough leverage to effectively thwart DRM. We still believe you have a
fundamental right to modify the software on all the hardware you own;
the preamble explains, "If such problems [as locked-down hardware]
arise substantially in other domains, we stand ready to extend this
provision to those domains in future versions of the GPL, as needed to
protect the freedom of users."
Section 11
How do the new terms of section 11 affect the Microsoft-Novell deal?
We attack the Microsoft-Novell deal from two angles. First, in
the sixth paragraph of section 11, the draft says that if you arrange
to provide patent protection to some of the people who get the software
from you, that protection is automatically extended to everyone who
receives the software, no matter how they get it. This means that the
patent protection Microsoft has extended to Novell's customers would be
extended to everyone who uses any software Novell distributes under
GPLv3.
Second, in the seventh paragraph, the draft says that you are
prohibited from distributing software under GPLv3 if you make an
agreement like the Microsoft-Novell deal in the future. This will prevent other
distributors from trying to make other deals like it.
Copyright © 2006, 2007
Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor,
Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA. Verbatim copying and distribution of
this entire article are permitted worldwide, without royalty, in
any medium, provided this notice, and the copyright notice, are
preserved.
Plone™
is Copyright
2000-
2021
by the
Plone Foundation
et al.
Plone™ and the Plone logo are trademarks of the
Plone Foundation
Distributed under the
GNU GPL license
This site conforms to the following standards:
Section 508
WCAG
Valid XHTML
Valid CSS