Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on March 31, 2007 12:25 AM
This draft of GPL 3 is still more confusing than GPL 2. Vague and legally dangerous language is used in important places - like the definition of "Corresponding Source".There we see the term by intimate data communication. The rest of the definition looks OK but all of a sudden we see "intimacy" involved. In today's wired environment programs communicate with other programs all the time in many ways, but "intimate" is not one of them (Nor is "complex" - how it was in the previous draft). Why are such unclear terms introduced in the license is beyond me. This license should be very clear - both for programmers and lawyers. I would like to ask FSF to work a bit more on it and to address Linus' concerns as well as the need for an understandable license without legal mines.
I will submit a comment to the FSF and hope for their understanding.
A link to the license:
<a href="http://gplv3.fsf.org/gpl-draft-2007-03-28.html" title="fsf.org">
gplv3 draft3 </a fsf.org>
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
The language of draft 3 is still very vague
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on March 31, 2007 12:25 AMI will submit a comment to the FSF and hope for their understanding.
A link to the license:
<a href="http://gplv3.fsf.org/gpl-draft-2007-03-28.html" title="fsf.org">
gplv3 draft3 </a fsf.org>
#