Licence change

Dear list,

For the maintainer of a given package, is it possible to change the 
licence of a it from GPL >= 2 to GPL >= 3 ?

Thanks in advance,

Mauricio Zambrano-Bigiarini, Ph.D
=================================================
Water Resources Unit
Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES)
Joint Research Centre (JRC), European Commission
TP 261, Via Enrico Fermi 2749, 21027 Ispra (VA), IT
webinfo    : http://floods.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
=================================================
DISCLAIMER:\ "The views expressed are purely those of th...{{dropped:9}}
Dear list,

For the maintainer of a given package, is it possible to change the
licence of a it from GPL >= 2 to GPL >= 3 ?
Are you the author and copyright holder of everything in the package?  
If so, then I think the answer is yes.

If not, then what license did the author give you for the parts you 
didn't write?  You'll need to consult that, to find out if you can still 
distribute the code with a more restrictive license.  For example, if 
you're using some code that was licensed under GPL 2 (not GPL >= 2), 
then you need permission from the author of it to distribute it under a 
different license.

If you are distributing the package on CRAN, you'll have to ask them 
whether they'll still choose to distribute your package after the change.

Duncan Murdoch

Dear list,

For the maintainer of a given package, is it possible to change the licence of a it from GPL >= 2 to GPL >= 3 ?

In general the maintainer has no such rights. However, if the maintainer is also the author and holds all copyright, he can release the package under any license he feels fit. What has been already released cannot be affected, obviously, but you can release a new version under a different license if you have the legal right to do so.

(This is not related to the possibility, but one practical problem with requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2 compatible so it's a decision that better be made very consciously with all the consequences in mind).

Cheers,
Simon
Thanks in advance,

Mauricio Zambrano-Bigiarini, Ph.D

-- 
=================================================
Water Resources Unit
Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES)
Joint Research Centre (JRC), European Commission
TP 261, Via Enrico Fermi 2749, 21027 Ispra (VA), IT
webinfo    : http://floods.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
=================================================
DISCLAIMER:\ "The views expressed are purely those of th...{{dropped:9}}

______________________________________________
R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

On May 3, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Mauricio Zambrano-Bigiarini wrote:

Dear list,

For the maintainer of a given package, is it possible to change the licence of a it from GPL >= 2 to GPL >= 3 ?

In general the maintainer has no such rights. However, if the maintainer is also the author and holds all copyright, he can release the package under any license he feels fit. What has been already released cannot be affected, obviously, but you can release a new version under a different license if you have the legal right to do so.
Thank you very much Duncan and Simon for your replies.

The package I'm asking about has 1 author [aut] (me) and 1 contributor 
[ctb] in the 'Author' field of the DESCRIPTION file. Both of them hold 
the copyright of the package.

In case we want to change the licence. Do the 2 authors write something 
particular in the next submission to CRAN ?
Do we need to provide some written document to CRAN ?

What Duncan means with
"If you are distributing the package on CRAN, you'll have to ask them 
whether they'll still choose to distribute your package after the change"

May CRAN to decide not to distribute the package because of the change 
in the licence ?
(This is not related to the possibility, but one practical problem with requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2 compatible so it's a decision that better be made very consciously with all the consequences in mind).
If the package we are talking about is pure R code, with only some 
dependencies to other R packages, what are the implications of:

" one practical problem with requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2 
compatible"

Thanks again,

Mauricio
=================================================
Linux user #454569 -- Ubuntu user #17469
=================================================
"Study, Practice and Teach" (Jim Rohn)
On 03/05/13 16:56, Simon Urbanek wrote:
On May 3, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Mauricio Zambrano-Bigiarini wrote:

Dear list,

For the maintainer of a given package, is it possible to change the licence of a it from GPL >= 2 to GPL >= 3 ?

In general the maintainer has no such rights. However, if the maintainer is also the author and holds all copyright, he can release the package under any license he feels fit. What has been already released cannot be affected, obviously, but you can release a new version under a different license if you have the legal right to do so.
Thank you very much Duncan and Simon for your replies.

The package I'm asking about has 1 author [aut] (me) and 1 contributor
[ctb] in the 'Author' field of the DESCRIPTION file. Both of them hold
the copyright of the package.

In case we want to change the licence. Do the 2 authors write something
particular in the next submission to CRAN ?
Do we need to provide some written document to CRAN ?

What Duncan means with
"If you are distributing the package on CRAN, you'll have to ask them
whether they'll still choose to distribute your package after the change"

May CRAN to decide not to distribute the package because of the change
in the licence ?
You'll have to ask them that.

(This is not related to the possibility, but one practical problem with requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2 compatible so it's a decision that better be made very consciously with all the consequences in mind).
If the package we are talking about is pure R code, with only some
dependencies to other R packages, what are the implications of:

" one practical problem with requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2
compatible"
It may mean that one of your users won't be able to use the package, for 
example if something else that they need requires GPL-2 licensing.

Duncan Murdoch
Thank you very much for all the feedback.

I will think about carefully.

All the best,

Mauricio
=====================================
Linux user #454569 -- Ubuntu user #17469
=====================================
"If you torture any data set long enough, 
it will confess anything!" (Murray Lark)

On 05/03/13, Duncan Murdoch  <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 03/05/2013 11:31 AM, Mauricio Zambrano-Bigiarini wrote:
> >On 03/05/13 16:56, Simon Urbanek wrote:
> >>
> >> On May 3, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Mauricio Zambrano-Bigiarini wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dear list,
> >>>
> >>> For the maintainer of a given package, is it possible to change the licence of a it from GPL >= 2 to GPL >= 3 ?
> >>>
> >>
> >> In general the maintainer has no such rights. However, if the maintainer is also the author and holds all copyright, he can release the package under any license he feels fit. What has been already released cannot be affected, obviously, but you can release a new version under a different license if you have the legal right to do so.
> >
> >Thank you very much Duncan and Simon for your replies.
> >
> >The package I'm asking about has 1 author [aut] (me) and 1 contributor
> >[ctb] in the 'Author' field of the DESCRIPTION file. Both of them hold
> >the copyright of the package.
> >
> >In case we want to change the licence. Do the 2 authors write something
> >particular in the next submission to CRAN ?
> >Do we need to provide some written document to CRAN ?
> >
> >
> >What Duncan means with
> >"If you are distributing the package on CRAN, you'll have to ask them
> >whether they'll still choose to distribute your package after the change"
> >
> >May CRAN to decide not to distribute the package because of the change
> >in the licence ?
> 
> You'll have to ask them that.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> (This is not related to the possibility, but one practical problem with requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2 compatible so it's a decision that better be made very consciously with all the consequences in mind).
> >
> >If the package we are talking about is pure R code, with only some
> >dependencies to other R packages, what are the implications of:
> >
> >" one practical problem with requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2
> >compatible"
> 
> It may mean that one of your users won't be able to use the package, for example if something else that they need requires GPL-2 licensing.
> 
> Duncan Murdoch

" one practical problem with requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2
compatible"
It may mean that one of your users won't be able to use the package, for example if something else that they need requires GPL-2 licensing.
Actually, with the GPL licenses, usage is not a problem, but distribution can be. 

These legalities are a bit inane, and I try to forget about them as far as possible, but I think trouble kicks in if someone wants to distribute a work that derives from both GPL-2 and GPL-3 codes.  What "derived" means is yet another inane discussion...
Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
Phone: (+45)38153501
Email: pd.mes at cbs.dk  Priv: PDalgd at gmail.com
On May 3, 2013, at 18:42 , Duncan Murdoch wrote:

" one practical problem with requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2
compatible"
It may mean that one of your users won't be able to use the package, for example if something else that they need requires GPL-2 licensing.
Actually, with the GPL licenses, usage is not a problem, but distribution can be.
Yes, absolutely.

Duncan Murdoch
These legalities are a bit inane, and I try to forget about them as far as possible, but I think trouble kicks in if someone wants to distribute a work that derives from both GPL-2 and GPL-3 codes.  What "derived" means is yet another inane discussion...