The fourth draft version of GPL 3 will be the final draft version of GPL 3, and the Free Software Foundation has set a date of June 29 for the official release of GPL 3.
On Thursday (5/31), the Free Software Foundation (FSF) released the fourth draft version of GPL 3, which will be the final draft version of GPL 3, and the FSF has set the official release date of GPL 3 for implementation on June 29 this year. Feedback will be heard before then.
The major difference between this version and the third draft is that it resolves the legal compatibility issue between the FSF and the Apache Software Foundation through a compatible license, meaning that developers can combine software licensed from the FSF and Apache respectively to create a larger application.
Another high-profile issue is the way GPL 3 deals with Novell's partnership with Microsoft. The new draft does not prohibit such cooperation directly, but states that if a company provides patent protection to users who have obtained software from the company, that protection will automatically extend to any user who has obtained the software, regardless of how the user obtained the software.
In its agreement with Novell, Microsoft agreed not to Sue Novell Linux customers for infringement, and Microsoft could sell Novell products.
This makes Microsoft a Linux distributor and is regulated by the GPL 3, so the patent protections Microsoft offers Novell customers extend to any customer using Novell products developed under the GPL 3.
The GPL is an open source general license that provides users with the right to freely study, copy, share, reuse, and modify it. It was drafted by Free Software Foundation founder Richard Stallman in 1998 and has not been modified since GPL 2 for 16 years.
Richard Stallman urged developers and industry to upgrade to GPL 3 as soon as possible. He cited several reasons, including that GPL 3 would prevent computers from containing GPL software that cannot be modified, which is often used by computer manufacturers to provide features that users do not want, such as rights management software (DRM), but which does not fall under the definition of free software, which means that users can control what the software can do.
Richard Stallman also pointed out that GPL 3 would turn Microsoft's claim that open source products violated hundreds of its patents into a weapon against Microsoft. Other benefits include internationalization, BitTorren support, and interworking with Apache licenses.
In addition, given that some developers still prefer GPL 2, Richard Stallman states that GPL 2 is still a valid license, and that even if some people use GPL 2 or some people use GPL 3, it will not be too much of a problem, although the two licenses are incompatible, but the problem is not serious.
Since the incompatibility of GPL 2 and GPL 3 means that there is no legal way to combine software development projects built on these two different licenses, Richard Stallman stated that this incompatibility only occurs when developers want to combine two projects under different licenses into a single project. It does not prevent software under different licenses from operating in the same operating system.