My understanding of this GPL hole is that a creator can revoke the GPL up until
the point where they have incorporated submissions from others. That's second
hand info from a friend who took a course with Eben Moglen.
> > Now you may think the GPL (and/or other GNU licensed works like the
> > LGPL, FDL, etc...) protects your work. What you may not realize is
> > that Copyright Law is the _ultimate_ law. The software that cracked
> > the encryption (really "uglification") and revealed the follies of
> > popular "Internet Filtering" software were perfect examples. The
> > software was released GPL, but then revoked later. How? Because
> > the creators ultimately have "all rights reserved" to their
> > copyright, and can revoke any license at any time (like they did
> > when the popular filtering software vendors bought the rights).
> > When you post, upload or otherwise transmit through a
> > Passport.COM-enabled service, you are effectively giving Microsoft
> > a non-exclusive, "blank 'copyright' check" to use your work.
> > Now one way you can "protect" your free software/works from being
> > submissive to this "hole" in Copyright Law is to assign all rights
> > to the Free Software Foundation. In fact, this is exactly what the
> > FSF recommends you do with any GNU licensed work. If you have not
> > done so already, consider doing this with any GPL, LGPL, FDL or
> > other GNU-licensed work that you do not plan to "dual-license"
> > yourself or other entity.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 29 2001 - 20:25:25 PDT