Re: [Fsfe-uk] GPLv3 draft available

[Alex Hudson]

On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 20:19 +0000, Tom Chance wrote:
> I'm not entirely clear on the introduction of "propagation", though. What do 
> they mean when the say: "It appears that the FSF is subtly expanding the 
> scope of the license and trying to cover some areas that were not explicitly 
> covered by the GPLv2, and abused by some parties."

I don't think that's right - from what I've read of Eben Moglen's talk
on the subject, the use of the word 'propagation' was deliberately
chosen simply because it doesn't appear in any international laws. 

I'm not totally sure why this is a benefit, I suppose that it's meant to
be interpreted as broadly as local law allows (if you used a different
word, it might have a specific, narrower, meaning and that could
potentially mean the copyleft provisions don't kick in or something).

If that's correct, I would say it's more closing loopholes than
increasing the scope of the licence.

> Is this a reference to the problem of web sites using GPL-licensed code like 
> a 
> CMS? What other cases does it cover?

I don't think the 'web apps' thing actually comes into play here: that
is a restriction on modification, as opposed to distribution, and
optional in any event.

I think overall the GPLv3 draft is a net less restrictive licence,
particularly when it comes to playing nicely with other licences. I also
think the DRM thing looks pretty keen; I suspect the web app business
will be the only truly controversial part.

Cheers,

Alex.