From: Gregory Brown Date: 2006-04-07T09:43:26+09:00 Subject: Re: GPL v3 and Ruby License. On 4/6/06, Daniel Baird wrote: > I'm not convinced that's what the licence is saying. If the program licence > terms say "GPL2 or later", I think this clause in GPL2 is saying only that > you can opt to *comply with* any later version. I don't think it's saying > that you can re-release the program code with licence terms of "GPLv3 or > later" -- just that for your specific use of the program, you can choose > which one you comply with. You absolutely, positively, can redistribute the software under a later version. That is the whole point of the clause. This was explictly mentioned by Eben Moglen and Richard Stallman at the meeting I attended last weekend. If you grant permission for redistribution under the terms of GPL version 'foo' or any later version... since this permission is granted outside of the license, but the ability to do so is granted inside the license, a redistributer is free to remove the 'or any later version', upgrade to a newer version, etc. You can't place additional restrictions on re-distribution AFAIK. I do not think you could say 'freedom is granted to use this software under v2 or later, but not redistribute under anything but v2'. I think that would be a conflict.