GPL v3 - just delete a piece of it

[z.turtle]

Here's the thing. Although it's convenient to just say VideoLAN is GPL, it's just a short way of saying you're using a copy of the GPL which applies to VLC. The news article (about why you're staying with GPL v2) listed just two paragraphs of text, which seemed relatively self contained and uninterrupted, from the GPL v3. Why not remove them and tack on to the end of the license a statement that if VLC goes under a GPL v4 license in the future, differences between the current license and GPL v3 will remain in effect. Call it a modified GPL v3, and put information on videolan.org somewhere about what is different for those who are curious (no need to distribute it). Anyone see a problem with that?

[funman]

what's the problem if we stick with gplv2 ?

[z.turtle]

I'm sure the world won't blow up if you stay at V2. But the article clearly said that there were pieces of V3 that you liked. I'm just pointing out that there really isn't any barrier keeping you back as I see it.

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

I'm sure the world won't blow up if you stay at V2. But the article clearly said that there were pieces of V3 that you liked. I'm just pointing out that there really isn't any barrier keeping you back as I see it.

yes, the thing, is that nothing evolved on that part. Only libsamba is GPLv3 only, so now, statu quo.

[MetalheadGautham]

I'm sure the world won't blow up if you stay at V2. But the article clearly said that there were pieces of V3 that you liked. I'm just pointing out that there really isn't any barrier keeping you back as I see it.

yes, the thing, is that nothing evolved on that part. Only libsamba is GPLv3 only, so now, statu quo.

the problem is that you need to keep VLC compatible with all the existing licences. I suggest you think of having your own VideoLAN licence. I can help word that.

[funman]

eheh ok

To be frank with you, I personally do not care that much about legal stuff. I'm relying on others to keep me informed of really important stuff.