|
|
|
| Authored by: arnt on Sunday, May 20 2012 @ 10:02 PM EDT |
<blockquote>
> Personally, I feel like releasing some of my own code under
> the GPL but it will be marked 'Not for use in the USA'.
>
> If that marking is part of the license or imposed as a
> requirement for use, it can't be GPLed.
</blockquote>
..maybe we should draft such a beast, a "non-US GPL", to
make that point, and, carry it across to the legislators?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: DieterWasDriving on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 04:03 AM EDT |
You would need to check a lawyer in your country, but it might be possible to
add that wording without it constituting a modification of the GPL.
The wording is "not for use in", which may be considered advisory
instead of an additional restriction. It's a bit different than a phrase such
as "shall not be used in" which is clearly a restriction.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Wol on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 04:20 PM EDT |
I thought "location of use" restrictions were explicitly *permitted*
in the GPL (certainly version 2) for precisely this reason.
To get round legal problems.
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
