GPLv2 to v3 upgrade and "further restrictions" issue

[Thomas Charron]

On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 7:49 AM, Roberto Gordo
Saez<roberto.gordo at gmail.com> wrote:
> If I have a GPLv3 program with "further restrictions", I can remove them,
> that is clear. If I have a GPLv2 program that "permits relicensing or
> conveying under this License", then I can use it under the GPLv3
> "provided that the further restriction does not survive".

  In my opinion (IANAL), the combination of terms makes for an invalid
license.  So even though the GPLv2 or greater is in there currently,
the GPL v3 says you CAN'T attach those strings, but they're there
already.  And they're clearly contradictory.  It's like mom saying you
can have a cookie, and dad saying if ignore dad.  Which one has
precedence over the other?  A judge can decide which sections are in
the intent, but an end user really can't just willy nilly decide that
it's not applicable to you.  And in a court of law, I'd honestly say,
the intent is clear.  They DON'T want you to do what you are clearly
attempting to.

  I agree with the idea of respecting the original authors intent.
Why in gods name would you want to intentionally piss off someone who
basically gave you something for free?  Never mind the legality, but
if I'D heard a complaint like that about you, I would personally avoid
your products and solutions at all cost.

-- 
-- Thomas