From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC681C004C9 for ; Sun, 5 May 2019 05:15:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C535B2087F for ; Sun, 5 May 2019 05:15:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=redchan.it header.i=@redchan.it header.b="axPaIcd3" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726957AbfEEFPG (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 May 2019 01:15:06 -0400 Received: from mx1.cock.li ([185.10.68.5]:56791 "EHLO cock.li" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725814AbfEEFPG (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 May 2019 01:15:06 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 493 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sun, 05 May 2019 01:15:04 EDT MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=redchan.it; s=mail; t=1557032809; bh=zfpi9O1/J+wQXfa7/ZEITKZBdVsIPCCVvs0i+JXK0hg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:From; b=axPaIcd3/IV3a35DHnO9CLdyoUlY2lqmKRJwv0IoSSs8Mu54nEmolQDiijwhmyJGo hjufMDJy+dMUaWgQQ1mSy9OimnOHr5brsIARaKJJrDnzfmv34jtChA/ogtBaSHzuUi fQc81lmjVZKAJ7hpxBk8wEZpFplOeAf9LLyegNoS1KcoG6IeCLcV8ZQFaHwhTf4kYi hL9xazkinROdJqFBiE/MVn6coq5yqeuZ2tJVMc2AulEhKzQMlWUUt2+n3tHiiLUTki U4u8FkTaqg/3gF4vUC9HNLDb4s9APmlHsr3MnZ9SFF4wLv0xboXOhLSqUMe6/gvPBh ZHfWdgrMefIEg== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 05 May 2019 05:06:48 +0000 From: vsnsdualce3@redchan.it To: Thomas Schmitt Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qmastery16@gmail.com, rhkramer@gmail.com, mailinglists@mattcrews.com, jhasler@newsguy.com, richard@walnut.gen.nz, curty@free.fr, jmtd@debian.org, mick.crane@gmail.com, tomas@tuxteam.de, steve@einval.com, joe@jretrading.com, rms@gnu.org, esr@thyrsus.com Subject: Re: Can a recipients rights under GNU GPL be revoked? Message-ID: <741a011e7ee2fdec77ddd8f187db6cc6@redchan.it> X-Sender: vsnsdualce3@redchan.it User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Note the word "irrevocable". So i think GPLv3 is safe. You think wrong. Do you know what an illusory promise is? We'll you're staring at one there. No bargained-for consideration (read: payment), No enforceable contract. And, no, "obeying the license" isn't "payment": you have to do that regardless: otherwise you're committing copyright infringement, which you have a pre-existing duty to avoid. On 2019-01-28 16:19, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > Ivan Ivanov wrote: >> Yes: The linux devs can rescind their license grant. GPLv2 is a bare >> license and is revocable by the grantor. > > Do you mean > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/12/24/209 > ? > > The GPL does not say that it can be rescinded at the will of the > grantor. > In GPLv3 it is explicitely stated: > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > 2. Basic Permissions. > > All rights granted under this License are granted for the term of > copyright on the Program, and are irrevocable provided the stated > conditions are met. This License explicitly affirms your unlimited > permission to run the unmodified Program. The output from running a > covered work is covered by this License only if the output, given its > content, constitutes a covered work. This License acknowledges your > rights of fair use or other equivalent, as provided by copyright law. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Note the word "irrevocable". So i think GPLv3 is safe. > > In GPLv2, the preamble states intentions which clearly contradict a > reserved right to revoke the once given license. The TERMS AND > CONDITIONS > paragraph 4 say that if "you" lose the license rights because of > violations, > "parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this > License > will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain > in > full compliance". > This expresses a clear promise not to revoke the license from well > behaving > license takers. > > > Next the article quotes a conversation with Eben Moglen, lawyer of the > Free Software Foundation. > The only substance i see there is a reference to the principle that > gifts > can be demanded back under some circumstances. In german law it is > because > of the giver becomming needy or because the receiver shows outraging > unthankfulness (e.g. an attempt to murder the giver). > > I sincerely doubt that GPL is a gift in the sense of german BGB 516 - > 534. > Especially paragraph 517 says that waiving income in favor of somebody > else is not such a gift. The large number of license takers makes the > situation quite different from the one expected by german law. > > Further a demand to return the gift because of neediness would depend > on a binding offer from a third party to pay money if the software is > not under GPL any more. I think not even Microsoft Inc. would make such > an offer, nowadays. > > > Have a nice day :) > > Thomas