Diff of /infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html

Parent Directory | Revision Log | Patch

--- infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html	2009/04/16 02:37:39	765453
+++ infrastructure/site/trunk/docs/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html	2009/04/23 10:57:32	767889
@@ -77,6 +77,22 @@
 to be a <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html">free software</a>
 license, <a href="http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/compat.html">compatible</a> with version 3 of the <a href="http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html">GPL</a>.
 </p>
+<p>Apache 2 software can therefore be included in GPLv3 projects,
+because the GPLv3
+license accepts our software into GPLv3 works. However, GPLv3 software
+cannot be included in Apache projects. The licenses are incompatible in one
+direction only, and it is a result of ASF's licensing philosophy and the
+GPLv3 authors' interpretation of copyright law.</p>
+<p>This licensing incompatibility applies *only* when some Apache project
+software becomes a derivative work of some GPLv3 software, because then the
+Apache software would have to be distributed under GPLv3. This would be
+incompatible with ASF's requirement that all Apache software must be
+distributed under the Apache License 2.0.</p>
+<p>We avoid GPLv3 software because merely linking to it is considered by the
+GPLv3 authors to create a derivative work. We want to honor their license.
+Unless GPLv3 licensors relax this interpretation of their own license
+regarding linking, our licensing philosophies are fundamentally
+incompatible. This is an identical issue for both GPLv2 and GPLv3.</p>
 <p>Despite our best efforts, the FSF has never considered the Apache
 License to be compatible with GPL version 2, citing the patent
 termination and indemnification provisions as restrictions not present