Alexandre Oliva aoliva@redhat.com
Mon Jul 16 18:28:00 GMT 2007

On Jul 14, 2007, Michael Eager <eager@eagercon.com> wrote:

> Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
>> Michael Eager <eager@eagercon.com> writes:

>>> Unfortunately, as I understand it, this is not the case.  If you
>>> apply a GPLv3 patch to a previously GPLv2 branch after August 1, then
>>> this entire branch, and all files in it, magically and silently
>>> becomes GPLv3.  (This is unless FSF agrees with Mark's proposal
>>> to dual license patches.)

>> I hope the COPYING or similar file will contain the licence text
>> under which the code is distributed?

> Not until someone updates the txt.  Which should happen quickly,
> but if someone applies a GPLv3 patch to a previously GPLv2 branch,
> the entire branch becomes GPLv3, whether the COPYING file was
> updated or not.

And distributing a program (be it a file or a huge collection of
files) under GPLv3 without a copy of GPLv3 would amount to copyright
infringement, should the distribution be performed by anyone but the
copyright holder.  IANAL.

4. [...] provided that you [...] give all recipients a copy of this
  License along with the Program.

Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member         http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}

More information about the Gcc mailing list