[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [GNU-linux-libre] choosealicense.com fork with better wording, perha
Re: [GNU-linux-libre] choosealicense.com fork with better wording, perhaps ?
Thu, 04 Sep 2014 07:03:28 +1000
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
>>> In that case, "permissive" licenses also include restrictions -- but
>>> they are not described as such.
>> The choosealicense.com page for the MIT license actually does list the
>> requirement to keep a copy of the license and all copyright notices as a
> Yes, it does, using softer language. This same mode of language should
> be used in the GPL description. Rather than "requires" and "further
Good point. Here's their version:
> The GPL (V2 or V3) is a copyleft license that requires anyone who
> distributes your code or a derivative work to make the source
> available under the same terms. V3 is similar to V2, but further
> restricts use in hardware that forbids software alterations.
And, here's my modified version:
> The GPL (V2 or V3) is a copyleft license that ensures that anyone who
> distributes your code or a derivative work will make the source
> available under the same terms. V3 is similar to V2, but ensures that
> any hardware it is used in will permit software modifications.
(Personally, I don't think that "requires" is strong language in the
same way that "further restricts" is, but I've removed it anyway.)
I'm happy to submit this as a pull request, if you think the language
okay, but before I do, I would like to know if this change in language
would be sufficient to prevent a fork, or if there are other language
problems with the site.