[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/licenses/old-licenses gpl-2.0-faq.html gpl-...
|
From: |
Yavor Doganov |
|
Subject: |
www/licenses/old-licenses gpl-2.0-faq.html gpl-... |
|
Date: |
Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:01:57 +0000 |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Yavor Doganov <yavor> 08/09/02 15:01:57
Modified files:
licenses/old-licenses: gpl-2.0-faq.html gpl-2.0.html
Log message:
Boilerplate fixes.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.3&r2=1.4
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.6&r2=1.7
Patches:
Index: gpl-2.0-faq.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html,v
retrieving revision 1.3
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -b -r1.3 -r1.4
--- gpl-2.0-faq.html 20 Mar 2008 13:56:16 -0000 1.3
+++ gpl-2.0-faq.html 2 Sep 2008 15:01:55 -0000 1.4
@@ -14,9 +14,8 @@
href="/licenses/licenses.html">our licenses page</a>.</p>
<p>
-After you read this FAQ,
-<a href="http://www.gnu.org/cgi-bin/license-quiz.cgi";>you can test your
-knowledge of Free Software licensing with our quiz</a>.
+After you read this FAQ, <a href="/cgi-bin/license-quiz.cgi">you can
+test your knowledge of Free Software licensing with our quiz</a>.
</p>
<!-- Replace this list with the page's contents. -->
@@ -27,7 +26,7 @@
<ul>
<li><a href="#WhatDoesGPLStandFor" name="TOCWhatDoesGPLStandFor">What
- does "GPL" stand for?</a></li>
+ does “GPL” stand for?</a></li>
<li><a href="#DoesFreeSoftwareMeanUsingTheGPL"
name="TOCDoesFreeSoftwareMeanUsingTheGPL">Does free software mean
@@ -90,13 +89,16 @@
someone has a copy of a GPL-covered program, can I demand he give
me a copy?</a></li>
- <li><a href="#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid"
name="TOCWhatDoesWrittenOfferValid">What
- does this "written offer valid for any third party" mean? Does that mean
everyone
- in the world can get the source to any GPL'ed program no matter
what?</a></li>
-
- <li><a href="#TheGPLSaysModifiedVersions"
name="TOCTheGPLSaysModifiedVersions">The
- GPL says that modified versions, if released, must be "licensed ... to all
third
- parties." Who are these third parties?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid"
+ name="TOCWhatDoesWrittenOfferValid">What does this “written
+ offer valid for any third party” mean? Does that mean
+ everyone in the world can get the source to any GPL'ed program no
+ matter what?</a></li>
+
+ <li><a href="#TheGPLSaysModifiedVersions"
+ name="TOCTheGPLSaysModifiedVersions">The GPL says that modified
+ versions, if released, must be “licensed … to all
+ third parties.” Who are these third parties?</a></li>
<li><a href="#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney" name="TOCDoesTheGPLAllowMoney">Does
the GPL allow me to sell copies of the program for money?</a></li>
@@ -151,15 +153,16 @@
<li><a href="#WhatIsCompatible" name="TOCWhatIsCompatible">What does it
mean to
say that two licenses are compatible?</a></li>
- <li><a href="#WhatDoesCompatMean" name="TOCWhatDoesCompatMean">What
- does it mean to say a license is "compatible with the GPL"?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#WhatDoesCompatMean"
+ name="TOCWhatDoesCompatMean">What does it mean to say a license is
+ “compatible with the GPL”?</a></li>
<li><a href="#OrigBSD" name="TOCOrigBSD">Why is the original BSD
license incompatible with the GPL?</a></li>
- <li><a href="#MereAggregation" name="TOCMereAggregation">What is the
- difference between "mere aggregation" and "combining two modules into
- one program"?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#MereAggregation" name="TOCMereAggregation">What is
+ the difference between “mere aggregation” and
+ “combining two modules into one program”?</a></li>
<li><a href="#AssignCopyright" name="TOCAssignCopyright">Why does the
FSF require that contributors to FSF-copyrighted programs assign
@@ -224,8 +227,9 @@
<li><a href="#GPLUSGovAdd" name="TOCGPLUSGovAdd">Can the US Government
release improvements to a GPL-covered program?</a></li>
- <li><a href="#VersionTwoOrLater" name="TOCVersionTwoOrLater">Why should
- programs say "Version 2 of the GPL or any later version"?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#VersionTwoOrLater" name="TOCVersionTwoOrLater">Why
+ should programs say “Version 2 of the GPL or any later
+ version”?</a></li>
<li><a href="#GPLOutput" name="TOCGPLOutput">Is there some way that I
can GPL the output people get from use of my program? For example, if
@@ -279,8 +283,8 @@
<li><a href="#DistributingSourceIsInconvenient"
name="TOCDistributingSourceIsInconvenient">I want to distribute
binaries, but distributing complete source is inconvenient. Is it
- ok if I give users the diffs from the "standard" version along with the
- binaries?</a></li>
+ ok if I give users the diffs from the “standard”
+ version along with the binaries?</a></li>
<li><a href="#AnonFTPAndSendSources" name="TOCAnonFTPAndSendSources">I
want to make binaries available for anonymous FTP, but send sources
@@ -304,8 +308,9 @@
is running a modified version of a GPL'ed program on a web site.
Does the GPL say they must release their modified sources?</a></li>
- <li><a href="#InternalDistribution" name="TOCInternalDistribution">
- Is use within one organization or company "distribution"?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#InternalDistribution"
+ name="TOCInternalDistribution"> Is use within one organization or
+ company “distribution”?</a></li>
<li><a href="#StolenCopy" name="TOCStolenCopy">
If someone steals a CD containing a version of a GPL-covered
@@ -315,8 +320,9 @@
<li><a href="#TradeSecretRelease" name="TOCTradeSecretRelease">
What if a company distributes a copy as a trade secret?</a></li>
- <li><a href="#GPLFairUse" name="TOCGPLFairUse">Do I have "fair use"
- rights in using the source code of a GPL-covered program?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#GPLFairUse" name="TOCGPLFairUse">Do I have
+ “fair use” rights in using the source code of a
+ GPL-covered program?</a></li>
<li><a href="#DistributeSubsidiary" name="TOCDistributeSubsidiary">
Does moving a copy to a majority-owned, and controlled, subsidiary
@@ -372,12 +378,13 @@
<ul>
- <li><a href="#MereAggregation" name="TOCMereAggregation">What is the
- difference between "mere aggregation" and "combining two modules into
- one program"?</a></li>
-
- <li><a href="#GPLFairUse" name="TOCGPLFairUse">Do I have "fair use"
- rights in using the source code of a GPL-covered program?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#MereAggregation" name="TOCMereAggregation">What is
+ the difference between “mere aggregation” and
+ “combining two modules into one program”?</a></li>
+
+ <li><a href="#GPLFairUse" name="TOCGPLFairUse">Do I have
+ “fair use” rights in using the source code of a
+ GPL-covered program?</a></li>
<li><a href="#GPLUSGovAdd" name="TOCGPLUSGovAdd">Can the US Government
release improvements to a GPL-covered program?</a></li>
@@ -429,10 +436,10 @@
software in my proprietary system. Can I do this?</a></li>
<li><a href="#GPLWrapper" name="TOCGPLWrapper">I'd like to
- incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system.
- Can I do this by putting a "wrapper" module, under a GPL-compatible
- lax permissive license (such as the X11 license) in between the
- GPL-covered part and the proprietary part?</a></li>
+ incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I
+ do this by putting a “wrapper” module, under a
+ GPL-compatible lax permissive license (such as the X11 license) in
+ between the GPL-covered part and the proprietary part?</a></li>
<li><a href="#FSWithNFLibs" name="TOCFSWithNFLibs"> Can I write
free software that uses non-free libraries?</a></li>
@@ -512,19 +519,22 @@
<dl>
-<dt><b><a href="#TOCWhatDoesGPLStandFor" name="WhatDoesGPLStandFor">What does
"GPL" stand for?</a></b></dt>
-
-<dd>"GPL" stands for "General Public License". The most widespread such
-license is the GNU General Public License, or GNU GPL for short. This
-can be further shortened to "GPL", when it is understood that the GNU
-GPL is the one intended.
+<dt><b><a href="#TOCWhatDoesGPLStandFor"
+name="WhatDoesGPLStandFor">What does “GPL” stand
+for?</a></b></dt>
+
+<dd>“GPL” stands for “General Public License”.
+The most widespread such license is the GNU General Public License, or
+GNU GPL for short. This can be further shortened to
+“GPL”, when it is understood that the GNU GPL is the one
+intended.
<p></p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCDoesFreeSoftwareMeanUsingTheGPL"
name="DoesFreeSoftwareMeanUsingTheGPL">
Does free software mean using the GPL?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
-Not at all--there are many other free software licenses. We have an
+Not at all—there are many other free software licenses. We have an
<a href="/licenses/license-list.html"> incomplete
list</a>. Any license that provides the user <a
href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">certain specific
@@ -630,9 +640,9 @@
<dt><b><a href="#TOCGPLAndNonfreeOnSameMachine"
name="GPLAndNonfreeOnSameMachine">
Can I have a GPL-covered program and an unrelated non-free program on
the same computer?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
-Yes. The "mere aggregation" clause in the GPL makes this permission
-explicit, but that only reinforces what we believe would be true
-anyway.
+Yes. The “mere aggregation” clause in the GPL makes this
+permission explicit, but that only reinforces what we believe would be
+true anyway.
<p></p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCCanIDemandACopy" name="CanIDemandACopy">If I know
@@ -645,8 +655,9 @@
not to redistribute the program, if that is what he chooses.
<p></p></dd>
-<dt><b><a href="#TOCWhatDoesWrittenOfferValid"
name="WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid">
- What does this "written offer valid for any third party" mean?
+<dt><b><a href="#TOCWhatDoesWrittenOfferValid"
+ name="WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid"> What does this
+ “written offer valid for any third party” mean?
Does that mean everyone in the world can get the source to any
GPL'ed program no matter what?</a></b></dt>
@@ -667,16 +678,18 @@
can order the source code from you.
</p></dd>
-<dt><b><a href="#TOCTheGPLSaysModifiedVersions"
name="TheGPLSaysModifiedVersions">The
- GPL says that modified versions, if released, must be
- "licensed ... to all third parties." Who are these third
parties?</a></b></dt>
+<dt><b><a href="#TOCTheGPLSaysModifiedVersions"
+ name="TheGPLSaysModifiedVersions">The GPL says that modified
+ versions, if released, must be “licensed … to all
+ third parties.” Who are these third
+ parties?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
Section 2 says that modified versions you distribute must be licensed
-to all third parties under the GPL. "All third parties" means
-absolutely everyone--but this does not require you to *do* anything
-physically for them. It only means they have a license from you,
-under the GPL, for your version.
+to all third parties under the GPL. “All third parties”
+means absolutely everyone—but this does not require you
+to <strong>do</strong> anything physically for them. It only means
+they have a license from you, under the GPL, for your version.
<p></p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCRequiredToClaimCopyright"
@@ -727,8 +740,9 @@
<dd>
Yes. You can charge any fee you wish for distributing a copy of the
program. If you distribute binaries by download, you must provide
-"equivalent access" to download the source--therefore, the fee to
-download source may not be greater than the fee to download the binary.
+“equivalent access” to download the
+source—therefore, the fee to download source may not be greater
+than the fee to download the binary.
<p></p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCDoesTheGPLAllowRequireFee"
name="DoesTheGPLAllowRequireFee">
@@ -865,8 +879,9 @@
all-permissive license rather than the GNU GPL.
</p></dd>
-<dt><b><a href="#TOCWhatIsCompatible" name="WhatIsCompatible">What does it
- mean to say that two licenses are "compatible"?</a></b></dt>
+<dt><b><a href="#TOCWhatIsCompatible" name="WhatIsCompatible">What
+ does it mean to say that two licenses are
+ “compatible”?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
In order to combine two programs (or substantial parts of them) into a
@@ -876,8 +891,9 @@
incompatible.
<p>
For some licenses, the way in which the combination is made may affect
-whether they are compatible--for instance, they may allow linking two
-modules together, but not allow merging their code into one module.</p>
+whether they are compatible—for instance, they may allow linking
+two modules together, but not allow merging their code into one
+module.</p>
<p>
Just to install two separate programs in the same system,
it is not necessary that their licenses be compatible,
@@ -885,7 +901,8 @@
</dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCWhatDoesCompatMean" name="WhatDoesCompatMean">What
-does it mean to say a license is "compatible with the GPL".</a></b></dt>
+does it mean to say a license is “compatible with the
+GPL”.</a></b></dt>
<dd>
It means that the other license and the GNU GPL are compatible;
@@ -1000,13 +1017,13 @@
Only the copyright holders for the program can legally authorize this
exception. If you wrote the whole program yourself, then assuming your
employer or school does not claim the copyright, you are the copyright
-holder--so you can authorize the exception. But if you want to use parts
-of other GPL-covered programs by other authors in your code, you cannot
-authorize the exception for them. You have to get the approval of the
-copyright holders of those programs.
+holder—so you can authorize the exception. But if you want to
+use parts of other GPL-covered programs by other authors in your code,
+you cannot authorize the exception for them. You have to get the
+approval of the copyright holders of those programs.
</p><p>
When other people modify the program, they do not have to make the same
-exception for their code--it is their choice whether to do so.
+exception for their code—it is their choice whether to do so.
</p><p>
If the libraries you intend to link with are non-free, please also see
<a href="#FSWithNFLibs">the section on writing Free Software which
@@ -1020,8 +1037,8 @@
<dd>
Under the Berne Convention, everything written is automatically
copyrighted from whenever it is put in fixed form. So you don't have
-to do anything to "get" the copyright on what you write--as long as
-nobody else can claim to own your work.
+to do anything to “get” the copyright on what you
+write—as long as nobody else can claim to own your work.
<p>
However, registering the copyright in the US is a very good idea. It
will give you more clout in dealing with an infringer in the US.</p>
@@ -1048,9 +1065,9 @@
<dd>
Many universities nowadays try to raise funds by restricting the use
of the knowledge and information they develop, in effect behaving
-little different from commercial businesses. (See "The Kept
-University", Atlantic Monthly, March 2000, for a general discussion of
-this problem and its effects.)
+little different from commercial businesses. (See “The Kept
+University”, Atlantic Monthly, March 2000, for a general
+discussion of this problem and its effects.)
<p>
If you see any chance that your school might refuse to allow your
program to be released as free software, it is best to raise the issue
@@ -1060,10 +1077,10 @@
more leverage.</p>
<p>
So we recommend that you approach them when the program is only
-half-done, saying, "If you will agree to releasing this as free
-software, I will finish it." Don't think of this as a bluff. To
-prevail, you must have the courage to say, "My program will have
-liberty, or never be born."
+half-done, saying, “If you will agree to releasing this as free
+software, I will finish it.” Don't think of this as a bluff. To
+prevail, you must have the courage to say, “My program will have
+liberty, or never be born.”
</p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCCouldYouHelpApplyGPL" name="CouldYouHelpApplyGPL">Could
@@ -1109,7 +1126,7 @@
Strictly speaking, the GPL is a license from the developer for others
to use, distribute and change the program. The developer itself is
not bound by it, so no matter what the developer does, this is not
-a "violation" of the GPL.
+a “violation” of the GPL.
<p>
However, if the developer does something that would violate the GPL if
done by someone else, the developer will surely lose moral standing in
@@ -1137,11 +1154,11 @@
on the license you use for your code.
<p>
Some programs copy parts of themselves into the output for technical
-reasons--for example, Bison copies a standard parser program into its
-output file. In such cases, the copied text in the output is covered
-by the same license that covers it in the source code. Meanwhile, the
-part of the output which is derived from the program's input inherits
-the copyright status of the input.</p>
+reasons—for example, Bison copies a standard parser program into
+its output file. In such cases, the copied text in the output is
+covered by the same license that covers it in the source code.
+Meanwhile, the part of the output which is derived from the program's
+input inherits the copyright status of the input.</p>
<p>
As it happens, Bison can also be used to develop non-free programs.
This is because we decided to explicitly permit the use of the Bison
@@ -1150,18 +1167,20 @@
which already permitted use for non-free programs.
</p></dd>
-<dt><b><a href="#TOCGPLFairUse" name="GPLFairUse">Do I have "fair use"
- rights in using the source code of a GPL-covered program?</a></b></dt>
+<dt><b><a href="#TOCGPLFairUse" name="GPLFairUse">Do I have
+ “fair use” rights in using the source code of a
+ GPL-covered program?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
-Yes, you do. "Fair use" is use that is allowed without any special
-permission. Since you don't need the developers' permission for such
-use, you can do it regardless of what the developers said about it--in
-the license or elsewhere, whether that license be the GNU GPL or any
-other free software license.
+Yes, you do. “Fair use” is use that is allowed without
+any special permission. Since you don't need the developers'
+permission for such use, you can do it regardless of what the
+developers said about it—in the license or elsewhere, whether
+that license be the GNU GPL or any other free software license.
<p>
Note, however, that there is no world-wide principle of fair use; what
-kinds of use are considered "fair" varies from country to country.
+kinds of use are considered “fair” varies from country to
+country.
</p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCGPLUSGov" name="GPLUSGov">Can the US Government
@@ -1261,16 +1280,17 @@
use the interpreter on. You can run it on any data (interpreted program),
any way you like, and there are no requirements about licensing that data
to anyone.
-<p>However, when the interpreter is extended to provide "bindings" to
-other facilities (often, but not necessarily, libraries), the
-interpreted program is effectively linked to the facilities it uses
-through these bindings. So if these facilities are released under the
-GPL, the interpreted program that uses them must be released in a
-GPL-compatible way. The JNI or Java Native Interface is an example of
-such a binding mechanism; libraries that are accessed in this way are
-linked dynamically with the Java programs that call them. These
-libraries are also linked with the interpreter. If the interpreter is
-linked statically with these libraries, or if it is designed to
+<p>However, when the interpreter is extended to provide
+“bindings” to other facilities (often, but not
+necessarily, libraries), the interpreted program is effectively linked
+to the facilities it uses through these bindings. So if these
+facilities are released under the GPL, the interpreted program that
+uses them must be released in a GPL-compatible way. The JNI or Java
+Native Interface is an example of such a binding mechanism; libraries
+that are accessed in this way are linked dynamically with the Java
+programs that call them. These libraries are also linked with the
+interpreter. If the interpreter is linked statically with these
+libraries, or if it is designed to
<a href="#GPLPluginsInNF"> link dynamically with these specific
libraries</a>, then it too needs to be released in a GPL-compatible
way.</p>
@@ -1301,7 +1321,8 @@
<p>
That doesn't mean it is a good idea to write the program so that it
only runs on Windows. Doing so results in a program that is free
-software but <a href="/philosophy/java-trap.html"> "trapped" </a> (in
+software
+but <a href="/philosophy/java-trap.html">“trapped”</a> (in
this case, trapped by Windows instead of by Java, but the effect is
the same). (Historical note: As of December 2006 Sun is in the middle
of <a href="http://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-welcomes-gpl-java.html";>rereleasing
@@ -1346,9 +1367,9 @@
distributed.</p>
<p>
If the program dynamically links plug-ins, but the communication
-between them is limited to invoking the `main' function of the plug-in
-with some options and waiting for it to return, that is a borderline
-case.
+between them is limited to invoking the ‘main’ function of
+the plug-in with some options and waiting for it to return, that is a
+borderline case.
</p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCGPLPluginsInNF" name="GPLPluginsInNF">Can I apply the
@@ -1392,9 +1413,9 @@
when the main program is distributed for use with these plug-ins.</p>
<p>
If the program dynamically links plug-ins, but the communication
-between them is limited to invoking the `main' function of the plug-in
-with some options and waiting for it to return, that is a borderline
-case.</p>
+between them is limited to invoking the ‘main’ function of
+the plug-in with some options and waiting for it to return, that is a
+borderline case.</p>
<p>
See also the question <a href="#FSWithNFLibs">I am
writing free software that uses a non-free library.</a>
@@ -1459,10 +1480,10 @@
Only the copyright holders for the program can legally authorize this
exception. If you wrote the whole program yourself, then assuming your
employer or school does not claim the copyright, you are the copyright
-holder--so you can authorize the exception. But if you want to use parts
-of other GPL-covered programs by other authors in your code, you cannot
-authorize the exception for them. You have to get the approval of the
-copyright holders of those programs.
+holder—so you can authorize the exception. But if you want to
+use parts of other GPL-covered programs by other authors in your code,
+you cannot authorize the exception for them. You have to get the
+approval of the copyright holders of those programs.
</p><p></p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCManyDifferentLicenses"
@@ -1479,15 +1500,16 @@
<ul>
<li>To make my software work, it must be linked to the FOO library,
which is available under the Lesser GPL.</li>
-<li>My software makes a system call (with a command line that I built) to
- run the BAR program, which is licensed under "the GPL, with a
- special exception allowing for linking with QUUX".</li>
+<li>My software makes a system call (with a command line that I built)
+ to run the BAR program, which is licensed under “the GPL,
+ with a special exception allowing for linking with
+ QUUX”.</li>
</ul>
<p></p></dd>
-<dt><b><a href="#TOCMereAggregation" name="MereAggregation">What is the
- difference between "mere aggregation" and "combining two modules into
- one program"?</a></b></dt>
+<dt><b><a href="#TOCMereAggregation" name="MereAggregation">What is
+ the difference between “mere aggregation” and
+ “combining two modules into one program”?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
Mere aggregation of two programs means putting them side by side on
@@ -1498,8 +1520,8 @@
<p>
Combining two modules means connecting them together so that they form
a single larger program. If either part is covered by the GPL, the
-whole combination must also be released under the GPL--if you can't,
-or won't, do that, you may not combine them.</p>
+whole combination must also be released under the GPL—if you
+can't, or won't, do that, you may not combine them.</p>
<p>
What constitutes combining two parts into one program? This is a
legal question, which ultimately judges will decide. We believe that
@@ -1595,8 +1617,9 @@
<dd>
You can apply the GPL to any kind of work, as long as it is clear what
-constitutes the "source code" for the work. The GPL defines this as
-the preferred form of the work for making changes in it.
+constitutes the “source code” for the work. The GPL
+defines this as the preferred form of the work for making changes in
+it.
<p>
However, for manuals and textbooks, or more generally any sort of work
that is meant to teach a subject, we recommend using the GFDL rather
@@ -1650,31 +1673,32 @@
that they are not combined in a way that would make them
effectively a single program.</p>
<p>
-The difference between this and "incorporating" the GPL-covered
-software is partly a matter of substance and partly form. The
-substantive part is this: if the two programs are combined so that
+The difference between this and “incorporating” the
+GPL-covered software is partly a matter of substance and partly form.
+The substantive part is this: if the two programs are combined so that
they become effectively two parts of one program, then you can't treat
them as two separate programs. So the GPL has to cover the whole
thing.</p>
<p>
If the two programs remain well separated, like the compiler and the
kernel, or like an editor and a shell, then you can treat them as two
-separate programs--but you have to do it properly. The issue is
+separate programs—but you have to do it properly. The issue is
simply one of form: how you describe what you are doing. Why do we
care about this? Because we want to make sure the users clearly
understand the free status of the GPL-covered software in the
collection.</p>
<p>
-If people were to distribute GPL-covered software calling it "part of"
-a system that users know is partly proprietary, users might be
-uncertain of their rights regarding the GPL-covered software. But if they
-know that what they have received is a free program plus another
-program, side by side, their rights will be clear.
+If people were to distribute GPL-covered software calling it
+“part of” a system that users know is partly proprietary,
+users might be uncertain of their rights regarding the GPL-covered
+software. But if they know that what they have received is a free
+program plus another program, side by side, their rights will be
+clear.
</p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCGPLWrapper" name="GPLWrapper"> I'd like to
-incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system.
-Can I do this by putting a "wrapper" module, under a GPL-compatible
+incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do
+this by putting a “wrapper” module, under a GPL-compatible
lax permissive license (such as the X11 license) in between the
GPL-covered part and the proprietary part?</a></b></dt>
@@ -1717,8 +1741,8 @@
<p>
More concretely, the versions of the programs linked with the Money
Guzzler libraries would not really be free software as we understand
-the term--they would not come with full source code that enables users
-to change and recompile the program.
+the term—they would not come with full source code that enables
+users to change and recompile the program.
</p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCGPLIncompatibleAlone" name="GPLIncompatibleAlone">If
@@ -1729,13 +1753,14 @@
program?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
-If a program P is released under the GPL that means *any and every part of
-it* can be used under the GPL. If you integrate module Q, and release the
-combined program P+Q under the GPL, that means any part of P+Q can be used
-under the GPL. One part of P+Q is Q. So releasing P+Q under the GPL says
-that Q any part of it can be used under the GPL. Putting it in other
-words, a user who obtains P+Q under the GPL can delete P, so that just Q
-remains, still under the GPL.
+If a program P is released under the GPL that means <strong>any and
+every part of it</strong> can be used under the GPL. If you integrate
+module Q, and release the combined program P+Q under the GPL, that
+means any part of P+Q can be used under the GPL. One part of P+Q is
+Q. So releasing P+Q under the GPL says that Q any part of it can be
+used under the GPL. Putting it in other words, a user who obtains P+Q
+under the GPL can delete P, so that just Q remains, still under the
+GPL.
<p>
If the license of module Q permits you to give permission for that,
then it is GPL-compatible. Otherwise, it is not GPL-compatible.</p>
@@ -1751,10 +1776,10 @@
name="ModifiedJustBinary">Can I release a modified
version of a GPL-covered program in binary form only?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
-No. The whole point of the GPL is that all modified versions
-must be <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">
-free software</a>--which means, in particular, that the source
-code of the modified version is available to the users.
+No. The whole point of the GPL is that all modified versions must
+be <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html"> free software</a>—which
+means, in particular, that the source code of the modified version is
+available to the users.
<p></p></dd>
@@ -1782,8 +1807,8 @@
<p>
When a user orders the source, you have to make sure to get the source
to that user. If a particular user can conveniently get the source
-from you by anonymous FTP, fine--that does the job. But not every
-user can do such a download. The rest of the users are just as
+from you by anonymous FTP, fine—that does the job. But not
+every user can do such a download. The rest of the users are just as
entitled to get the source code from you, which means you must be
prepared to send it to them by post.</p>
<p>
@@ -1805,10 +1830,10 @@
Can I use the offer myself to obtain the source?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
-Yes, you can. The offer must be open to everyone who has a copy
-of the binary that it accompanies. This is why the GPL says your
-friend must give you a copy of the offer along with a copy of the
-binary---so you can take advantage of it.
+Yes, you can. The offer must be open to everyone who has a copy of
+the binary that it accompanies. This is why the GPL says your friend
+must give you a copy of the offer along with a copy of the
+binary—so you can take advantage of it.
<p></p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCSourceAndBinaryOnDifferentSites"
@@ -1817,11 +1842,12 @@
site?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
-The GPL says you must offer access to copy the source code "from the
-same place"; that is, next to the binaries. However, if you make
-arrangements with another site to keep the necessary source code
+The GPL says you must offer access to copy the source code “from
+the same place”; that is, next to the binaries. However, if you
+make arrangements with another site to keep the necessary source code
available, and put a link or cross-reference to the source code next
-to the binaries, we think that qualifies as "from the same place".
+to the binaries, we think that qualifies as “from the same
+place”.
<p>
Note, however, that it is not enough to find some site that happens to
have the appropriate source code today, and tell people to look there.
@@ -1844,8 +1870,9 @@
same binary.
<p>
Part of the idea of free software is that users should have access to
-the source code for *the programs they use*. Those using your version
-should have access to the source code for your version.</p>
+the source code for <strong>the programs they use</strong>. Those
+using your version should have access to the source code for your
+version.</p>
<p>
A major goal of the GPL is to build up the Free World by making sure
that improvement to a free program are themselves free. If you
@@ -1856,8 +1883,8 @@
<dt><b><a href="#TOCDistributingSourceIsInconvenient"
name="DistributingSourceIsInconvenient">I want to distribute
binaries, but distributing complete source is inconvenient. Is it
- ok if I give users the diffs from the "standard" version along with the
- binaries?</a></b></dt>
+ ok if I give users the diffs from the “standard” version
+ along with the binaries?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
This is a well-meaning request, but this method of providing the
@@ -1882,9 +1909,9 @@
can find a site to distribute your program, you can surely find one
that has room for the sources.
<p>
-The sources you provide must correspond exactly to the binaries.
-In particular, you must make sure they are for the same version of
-the program--not an older version and not a newer version.</p>
+The sources you provide must correspond exactly to the binaries. In
+particular, you must make sure they are for the same version of the
+program—not an older version and not a newer version.</p>
<p>
You can make the sources and binaries available on different machines,
provided they are equally easy to get to, and provided that you have
@@ -1920,10 +1947,10 @@
It is essential for people to have the freedom to make modifications
and use them privately, without ever publishing those modifications.
However, putting the program on a server machine for the public to
-talk to is hardly "private" use, so it would be legitimate to require
-release of the source code in that special case. We are thinking
-about doing something like this in GPL version 3, but we don't have
-precise wording in mind yet.</p>
+talk to is hardly “private” use, so it would be legitimate
+to require release of the source code in that special case. We are
+thinking about doing something like this in GPL version 3, but we
+don't have precise wording in mind yet.</p>
<p>
In the mean time, you might want to use the <a
href="http://www.affero.org/oagpl.html";>Affero GPL</a> for programs
@@ -1932,7 +1959,8 @@
<dt><b><a href="#TOCInternalDistribution"
name="InternalDistribution">Is making and using multiple copies
- within one organization or company "distribution"?</a></b></dt>
+ within one organization or company
+ “distribution”?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
No, in that case the organization is just making the copies for
@@ -2029,38 +2057,41 @@
</p></dd>
<dt><b><a href="#TOCVersionTwoOrLater" name="VersionTwoOrLater">Why
-should programs say "Version 2 of the GPL or any later version"?</a></b></dt>
+should programs say “Version 2 of the GPL or any later
+version”?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
-From time to time, at intervals of years, we change the GPL--sometimes
-to clarify it, sometimes to permit certain kinds of use not previously
-permitted, and sometimes to tighten up a requirement. (The last
-change was in 1991.) Using this "indirect pointer" in each program
-makes it possible for us to change the distribution terms on the
-entire collection of GNU software, when we update the GPL.
+From time to time, at intervals of years, we change the
+GPL—sometimes to clarify it, sometimes to permit certain kinds
+of use not previously permitted, and sometimes to tighten up a
+requirement. (The last change was in 1991.) Using this
+“indirect pointer” in each program makes it possible for
+us to change the distribution terms on the entire collection of GNU
+software, when we update the GPL.
<p>
If each program lacked the indirect pointer, we would be forced to
discuss the change at length with numerous copyright holders, which
would be a virtual impossibility. In practice, the chance of having
uniform distribution terms for GNU software would be nil.</p>
<p>
-Suppose a program says "Version 2 of the GPL or any later version" and
-a new version of the GPL is released. If the new GPL version gives
-additional permission, that permission will be available immediately
-to all the users of the program. But if the new GPL version has a
-tighter requirement, it will not restrict use of the current version
-of the program, because it can still be used under GPL version 2.
-When a program says "Version 2 of the GPL or any later version", users
-will always be permitted to use it, and even change it, according to
-the terms of GPL version 2--even after later versions of the GPL are
-available.</p>
+Suppose a program says “Version 2 of the GPL or any later
+version” and a new version of the GPL is released. If the new
+GPL version gives additional permission, that permission will be
+available immediately to all the users of the program. But if the new
+GPL version has a tighter requirement, it will not restrict use of the
+current version of the program, because it can still be used under GPL
+version 2. When a program says “Version 2 of the GPL or any
+later version”, users will always be permitted to use it, and
+even change it, according to the terms of GPL version 2—even
+after later versions of the GPL are available.</p>
<p>
If a tighter requirement in a new version of the GPL need not be
obeyed for existing software, how is it useful? Once GPL version 3 is
available, the developers of most GPL-covered programs will release
-subsequent versions of their programs specifying "Version 3 of the GPL
-or any later version". Then users will have to follow the tighter
-requirements in GPL version 3, for subsequent versions of the program.</p>
+subsequent versions of their programs specifying “Version 3 of
+the GPL or any later version”. Then users will have to follow
+the tighter requirements in GPL version 3, for subsequent versions of
+the program.</p>
<p>
However, developers are not obligated to do this; developers can
continue allowing use of the previous version of the GPL, if that is
@@ -2078,15 +2109,17 @@
The GPL was designed for programs; it contains lots of complex clauses
that are crucial for programs, but that would be cumbersome and
unnecessary for a book or manual. For instance, anyone publishing the
-book on paper would have to either include machine-readable "source
-code" of the book along with each printed copy, or provide a written
-offer to send the "source code" later.</p>
+book on paper would have to either include machine-readable
+“source code” of the book along with each printed copy, or
+provide a written offer to send the “source code”
+later.</p>
<p>
Meanwhile, the GFDL has clauses that help publishers of free manuals
-make a profit from selling copies--cover texts, for instance. The
-special rules for Endorsements sections make it possible to use the
-GFDL for an official standard. This would permit modified versions,
-but they could not be labeled as "the standard".</p>
+make a profit from selling copies—cover texts, for instance.
+The special rules for Endorsements sections make it possible to use
+the GFDL for an official standard. This would permit modified
+versions, but they could not be labeled as “the
+standard”.</p>
<p>
Using the GFDL, we permit changes in the text of a manual that covers
its technical topic. It is important to be able to change the
@@ -2095,9 +2128,9 @@
ethical imperative.</p>
<p>
Our manuals also include sections that state our political position
-about free software. We mark these as "invariant", so that they
-cannot be changed or removed. The GFDL makes provisions for these
-"invariant sections".
+about free software. We mark these as “invariant”, so
+that they cannot be changed or removed. The GFDL makes provisions for
+these “invariant sections”.
</p></dd>
@@ -2105,13 +2138,12 @@
GPL apply to fonts?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
-Font licensing is a complex issue which needs serious
-consideration. The following license exception is experimental but
-approved for general use. We welcome suggestions on this subject --
-please see this this <a
-href="http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/20050425novalis";>explanatory
+Font licensing is a complex issue which needs serious consideration.
+The following license exception is experimental but approved for
+general use. We welcome suggestions on this subject—please see
+this <a href="http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/20050425novalis";>explanatory
essay</a> and write to
-<a href="mailto:address@hidden";>address@hidden</a>.
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
<p>
To use this exception, add this text to the license notice of each
@@ -2132,12 +2164,12 @@
</p></dd>
-<dt><b><a href="#TOCWMS" name="WMS">
-I am writing a website maintenance system</a> (called a "<a
-href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html";>content
-management system</a>" by some), or some other application which
-generates web pages from templates. What license should I use for
-those templates?</b></dt>
+<dt><b><a href="#TOCWMS" name="WMS"> I am writing a website
+maintenance system</a> (called a
+“<a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html">content management
+system</a>” by some), or some other application which generates
+web pages from templates. What license should I use for those
+templates?</b></dt>
<dd>
<p>Templates are minor enough that it is not worth using copyleft to
@@ -2185,9 +2217,9 @@
However, if you link non-free libraries with the source code, that
would be an issue you need to deal with. It does not preclude
releasing the source code under the GPL, but if the libraries don't
-fit under the "system library" exception, you should affix an explicit
-notice giving permission to link your program with them. The FSF can
-give you advice on doing this.</p>
+fit under the “system library” exception, you should affix
+an explicit notice giving permission to link your program with them.
+The FSF can give you advice on doing this.</p>
</dd>
@@ -2202,8 +2234,8 @@
<p>
A legal document is in some ways like a program. Translating it is
like translating a program from one language and operating system to
-another. Only a lawyer skilled in both languages can do it--and even
-then, there is a risk of introducing a bug.</p>
+another. Only a lawyer skilled in both languages can do it—and
+even then, there is a risk of introducing a bug.</p>
<p>
If we were to approve, officially, a translation of the GPL, we would
be giving everyone permission to do whatever the translation says they
@@ -2270,12 +2302,13 @@
The interpreted program, to the interpreter, is just data; the GPL
doesn't restrict what tools you process the program with.
<p>
-However, when the interpreter is extended to provide "bindings" to
-other facilities (often, but not necessarily, libraries), the
-interpreted program is effectively linked to the facilities it uses
-through these bindings. The JNI or Java Native Interface is an
-example of such a facility; libraries that are accessed in this way
-are linked dynamically with the Java programs that call them.</p>
+However, when the interpreter is extended to provide
+“bindings” to other facilities (often, but not
+necessarily, libraries), the interpreted program is effectively linked
+to the facilities it uses through these bindings. The JNI or Java
+Native Interface is an example of such a facility; libraries that are
+accessed in this way are linked dynamically with the Java programs
+that call them.</p>
<p>
So if these facilities are released under a GPL-incompatible license,
the situation is like linking in any other way with a GPL-incompatible
@@ -2327,13 +2360,13 @@
Software under the GPL or some other Free Software license?</a></b></dt>
<dd>
-In general, the answer is no--this is not a legal requirement. In
-specific, the answer depends on which libraries you want to use and what
-their licenses are. Most system libraries either use the <a
-href="/copyleft/lesser.html">GNU Lesser GPL</a>, or use the GNU GPL plus an
-exception permitting linking the library with anything. These libraries
-can be used in non-free programs; but in the case of the Lesser GPL, it
-does have some requirements you must follow.
+In general, the answer is no—this is not a legal requirement.
+In specific, the answer depends on which libraries you want to use and
+what their licenses are. Most system libraries either use
+the <a href="/copyleft/lesser.html">GNU Lesser GPL</a>, or use the GNU
+GPL plus an exception permitting linking the library with anything.
+These libraries can be used in non-free programs; but in the case of
+the Lesser GPL, it does have some requirements you must follow.
<p>
Some libraries are released under the GNU GPL alone; you must use a
GPL-compatible license to use those libraries. But these are normally
@@ -2450,67 +2483,77 @@
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div id="footer">
- <p>
- Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
- <a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
- There are also <a href="http://www.fsf.org/about/contact.html";>other ways
to contact</a>
- the FSF.
- <br />
- Please send broken links and other corrections (or suggestions) to
- <a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
- </p>
-
- <p>
- Please see the
- <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
- README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
- translations of this article.
- </p>
-
<p>
-Copyright (C) 2001, 2006, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
-51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA
+Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
<br />
-Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Please see the
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
+translations of this article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright © 2001, 2006, 2007, 2008 Free Software Foundation,
+Inc.,</p>
+<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA</address>
+<p>Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is
permitted in any medium, provided this notice is preserved.
</p>
- <p>
- Updated:
- <!-- timestamp start -->
- $Date: 2008/03/20 13:56:16 $
- <!-- timestamp end -->
- </p>
+<p>
+Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2008/09/02 15:01:55 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
</div>
<div id="translations">
- <h4>Translations of this page</h4>
-
- <!-- Please keep this list alphabetical, and in the original -->
- <!-- language if possible, otherwise default to English -->
- <!-- If you do not have it English, please comment what the -->
- <!-- English is. If you add a new language here, please -->
- <!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
- <!-- - in /home/www/bin/nightly-vars either TAGSLANG or WEBLANG -->
- <!-- - in /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
- <!-- one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
- <!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
- <!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
- <!-- Please also check you have the 2 letter language code right versus -->
- <!-- http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/iso639.htm -->
-
- <ul class="translations-list">
- <li><a href="gpl-2.0-faq.cs.html">Česky</a></li>
- <li><a href="gpl-2.0-faq.html">English</a></li>
- <li><a href="gpl-2.0-faq.es.html">Español</a></li>
- <li><a href="gpl-2.0-faq.fr.html">Français</a></li>
- <li><a href="gpl-2.0-faq.it.html">Italiano</a></li>
- <li><a href="gpl-2.0-faq.ja.html">日本語</a></li>
- <li><a href="gpl-2.0-faq.ko.html">한국어</a></li>
- <li><a href="gpl-2.0-faq.pl.html">Polski</a></li>
- <li><a href="gpl-2.0-faq.pt-br.html">português do Brasil</a></li>
- </ul>
+<h4>Translations of this page</h4>
+<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical by language code. -->
+<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is German. -->
+<!-- Write the language name in its own language (Deutsch) in the text. -->
+<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
+<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
+<!-- - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
+<!-- - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
+<!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
+<!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
+<!-- Please also check you have the language code right; see: -->
+<!-- http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php -->
+<!-- If the 2-letter ISO 639-1 code is not available, -->
+<!-- use the 3-letter ISO 639-2. -->
+<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities. -->
+
+<ul class="translations-list">
+<!-- Czech -->
+<li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.cs.html">Česky</a> [cs]</li>
+<!-- English -->
+<li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html">English</a> [en]</li>
+<!-- Spanish -->
+<li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.es.html">Español</a> [es]</li>
+<!-- French -->
+<li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.fr.html">Français</a> [fr]</li>
+<!-- Italian -->
+<li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.it.html">Italiano</a> [it]</li>
+<!-- Japanese -->
+<li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.ja.html">日本語</a> [ja]</li>
+<!-- Korean -->
+<li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.ko.html">한국어</a> [ko]</li>
+<!-- Polish -->
+<li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.pl.html">Polski</a> [pl]</li>
+<!-- Brazilian Portuguese -->
+<li><a href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.pt-br.html">português do
Brasil</a> [pt-br]</li>
+</ul>
</div>
</div>
</body>
Index: gpl-2.0.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html,v
retrieving revision 1.6
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -b -r1.6 -r1.7
--- gpl-2.0.html 24 Jun 2008 01:02:37 -0000 1.6
+++ gpl-2.0.html 2 Sep 2008 15:01:55 -0000 1.7
@@ -6,12 +6,6 @@
<h2>GNU General Public License, version 2</h2>
-<div>
-<a href="/graphics/philosophicalgnu.html"><img
src="/graphics/philosophical-gnu-sm.jpg"
- alt=" [image of a Philosophical GNU] "
- width="160" height="200" /></a>
-</div>
-
<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical -->
<!-- tower, gpl.ja.html is Japanese translation of THIS PAGE, -->
<!-- NOT translation of GPL itself(gpl.ja.html contains the original -->
@@ -20,25 +14,13 @@
<!-- The same for the Czech page. The entire text of GPL is not -->
<!-- translated on this page. Thanks Sisao -->
-<div>
-[
- <a href="gpl-2.0.cs.html">Czech</a>
-| <a href="gpl-2.0.html">English</a>
-| <a href="gpl-2.0.ja.html">Japanese</a>
-]
- </div>
-
-
-<!-- It is best to not enumerate the translations here in a menu bar, -->
-<!-- It is best to have the users follow this link, so they have the FSF' -->
-<!-- explanation about translations being unofficial, etc. -->
-
<ul>
- <li><a href="/licenses/gpl-violation.html"><em>What to do if you see a
- possible GPL violation</em></a></li>
- <li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-translations.html"><em>Translations
- of the GPL</em></a></li>
- <li><a href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html"><em>GPL Frequently
Asked Questions</em></a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/gpl-violation.html">What to do if you see a
+ possible GPL violation</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-translations.html">Translations
+ of the GPL</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html">GPL Frequently
+ Asked Questions</a></li>
<li>The GNU General Public License (GPL)
<a href="gpl-2.0.txt">in plain text format</a></li>
<li>The GNU General Public License (GPL)
@@ -54,7 +36,9 @@
<h3>Table of Contents</h3>
<ul>
- <li><a name="TOC1" href="gpl-2.0.html#SEC1">GNU GENERAL PUBLIC
LICENSE</a></li>
+ <li><a name="TOC1" href="gpl-2.0.html#SEC1">GNU GENERAL PUBLIC
+ LICENSE<!--TRANSLATORS: Don't translate the license; copy msgid's
+ verbatim!--></a></li>
<li>
<ul>
<li><a name="TOC2" href="gpl-2.0.html#SEC2">Preamble</a></li>
@@ -547,17 +531,14 @@
<div id="footer">
-<p>
-Return to the <a href="/home.html">GNU Project home page</a>.
-</p>
<p>
Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
-There are also <a href="http://www.fsf.org/about/contact.html";>other ways to
contact</a>
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
the FSF.
<br />
-Please send broken links and other corrections (or suggestions) to
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
</p>
@@ -569,9 +550,9 @@
</p>
<p>
-Copyright notice above.<br />
-51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA
-<br />
+Copyright notice above.</p>
+<address>51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA</address>
+<p>
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is
permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is
preserved.
@@ -580,10 +561,38 @@
<p>
Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2008/06/24 01:02:37 $
+$Date: 2008/09/02 15:01:55 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
+
+<div id="translations">
+<h4>Translations of this page</h4>
+
+<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical by language code. -->
+<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is German. -->
+<!-- Write the language name in its own language (Deutsch) in the text. -->
+<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
+<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
+<!-- - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
+<!-- - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
+<!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
+<!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
+<!-- Please also check you have the language code right; see: -->
+<!-- http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php -->
+<!-- If the 2-letter ISO 639-1 code is not available, -->
+<!-- use the 3-letter ISO 639-2. -->
+<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities. -->
+
+<ul class="translations-list">
+<!-- Czech -->
+<li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.cs.html">Česky</a> [cs]</li>
+<!-- English -->
+<li><a href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html">English</a> [en]</li>
+<!-- Japanese -->
+<li><a
href="/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.ja.html">日本語</a> [ja]</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>
| [Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- www/licenses/old-licenses gpl-2.0-faq.html gpl-...,
Yavor Doganov <=