Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: GPLv2 or GPLv2+

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

    >     > You can create the Stephen J. Turnbull General Public
    >     > License that only contains the legal parts that just
    >     > happens to have the exact same terms as the GNU GPL.
    > 
    >    That is explicitly not permitted.
    > 
    > I never wrote `modify the GNU GPL', I wrote `the exact same
    > terms'.

   That's right, you didn't write "modify".  However, under the law
   what you describe would be considered modification.

No, it would not, ideas cannot be copyrighted.  And if that was the
case, all copyleft licenses would be illegal, since by your incorrect
interpretation they would be deriviates.  Which they are not.