Re: Overview of copyright issues

[Anthony W. Youngman]

In message <address@hidden>, Jan Nieuwenhuizen 
<address@hidden> writes
> Op donderdag 10-09-2009 om 23:47 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Graham
> Percival:
> > On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 04:37:46PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> > >
> > > On 9/10/09 4:02 PM, "Graham Percival" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 06:04:17PM +0200, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
>
> > Yes, but then the FSF went and royally screwed us by making GPLv3
> > incompatible with v2.  For an organization that's supposed to
> > encourage openness and collaboration, this was MONUMENTALLY
> > stupid.
>
> The FSF has always adviced and argued to use v2 or at your option
> any later version.  I got tired of arguing with Han-Wen that being
> paranoid does not bring you anything and gave in to strict v2, so
> it was *me* who was monumentally stupid.
>
> Jan.
Well, Han-Wen is in good company - Linus!

So I take this to mean all your code is v2+? Whatever Han-Wen said has 
no influence on YOUR code. And all we need is for Han-Wen to say he's 
happy with v3, and all your worries have gone away. (The problem is if 
Han-Wen goes away, but hopefully his will leaves all his copyrights to 
the FSF :-)

You may have been monumentally stupid, but it wasn't arguing about 
paranoia. It was trying to apply YOUR choice of licence to SOMEONE 
ELSE'S CODE. That's ALWAYS a stupid idea.

Cheers,
Wol
--
Anthony W. Youngman - address@hidden