GNU General Public License
Enable an agent to identify the GNU General Public License, resolve its applicable version and permissions, and assess the evidence needed before acting on a GPL-covered work.
Research draft, second pass
A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.
recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read
Researched by: Codex
Purpose and description
Enable an agent to identify the GNU General Public License, resolve its applicable version and permissions, and assess the evidence needed before acting on a GPL-covered work.
The GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) is a family of free software copyright licenses published by the Free Software Foundation that grant rights to use, study, modify and redistribute software, with copyleft conditions governing distribution of covered software and modified versions.
It can be Resolve a GPL reference to an authoritative version and preserve the evidence for that resolution.; Compare a work's licensing notices with package-level declarations and flag inconsistent coverage.; Evaluate a proposed distribution against version-specific conditions and identify missing evidence.; Assess a proposed component combination using exact license terms and a documented work-boundary analysis.; Prepare a source, notice, and installation-information review for a particular release.; Track unresolved obligations and remedy evidence before reassessing permission to distribute..
Distinguishing features
The name must resolve to GNU GPL rather than GNU LGPL or GNU AGPL; the AGPL adds a network-interaction source provision requirement. [GNU license overview](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/)
A version number alone does not establish whether later versions are permitted; the work's notice must distinguish a fixed version from an allowed later-version choice. [GNU guidance on identifying licenses](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/identify-licenses-clearly.html)
GPL copyleft requires analysis of whether components form a covered combined work or remain a mere aggregate; sharing a distribution medium alone does not settle the boundary. [GNU GPL FAQ](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html)
GPLv3 introduces version-specific provisions concerning installation information and patents, so family-level identification cannot substitute for reading the selected version. [GNU GPLv3 guide](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html.en)
Scope
+ GPL family identity, released versions, authoritative texts, and translations
+ Version selection through a work's licensing notice
+ Permissions, conditions, exceptions, and downstream licensing requirements
+ Source provision and other obligations associated with particular activities
+ Evidence supporting compliance, termination, and reinstatement assessments
- Software architecture, functionality, and release management except as evidence of license scope
- Independent models of the LGPL, AGPL, and permissive licenses
- Copyright ownership and contributor agreements beyond their relationship to a GPL grant
- General copyright doctrine and jurisdiction-specific litigation
- Physical devices and distribution infrastructure except where they affect obligations
Characteristics
- License text version
- GPL-1.0; GPL-2.0; GPL-3.0; unresolved Determines which text supplies the applicable definitions and conditions.
- Version-selection permission
- Specified version only; specified version or later; no version specified; ambiguous notice Separates the published license version from the choices actually granted for a work.
- Text authority
- Publisher-issued text; verified reproduction; explanatory translation; modified text; unresolved Prevents a translation, commentary, or altered license from silently becoming the operative text.
- Grant attachment
- Work or revision linked to licensing notice, granting rights holder, and supporting evidence A copy of a license file does not by itself resolve which material a grant covers.
- Additional permission or exception
- Exact text linked to affected material, issuer, and applicable GPL version An exception may change the permitted action without changing the underlying GPL family identity.
- Relevant activity
- Execution; private modification; source distribution; object-code distribution; network interaction; other or unresolved Supports activity-specific assessment instead of assuming every use produces identical obligations.
- Source provision route
- Accompanying source; written offer; network access; other version-permitted route; unresolved Connects the chosen route to its conditions and verification evidence.
- Grant standing
- Unassessed; supported as active; possible violation; terminated; provisional reinstatement; permanent reinstatement; disputed Records the assessed position for a particular recipient and grant, with version-specific justification.
- Obligation deadline
- Calendar date or duration in days or years, with triggering event and governing clause Makes source-offer and remedy obligations assessable without imposing one deadline across all versions.
Also called
Where this came from
wikidata · CC0 1.0
Drafted structure
Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 6 bundles · 11 layers · 18 findings · 29 questions.
GPL identity and version Resolve the registered license family into the particular text relevant to an assessment.
GPL versions and permission to choose among them must remain explicit.
Authoritative license text
Distinguish a released GPL text from reproductions, translations, and explanations.
Text and authority
Record version, publisher provenance, language, and text identity separately from any file carrying the text.
- Which released GNU GPL text does this reference identify? definition
- What publisher source and text comparison establish that the retrieved document is an accurate copy? provenance
Permitted version selection
Resolve the choices granted by the covered work's own notice.
Notice controls version choice
Preserve the exact notice and distinguish the minimum named version from the version selected for an action.
- Does the notice specify a version only, permit later versions, omit a version, or leave contradictory evidence? boundary
- Which version may be selected for the proposed action, and what notice language supports that choice? action
Grant and covered material Connect GPL terms to identifiable material and a supported licensing grant.
The license text and its application to a software work are distinct information objects.
Licensing evidence
Establish which notices apply to which files, revisions, or components.
Grant coverage evidence
Retain file notices, release declarations, and rights-holder evidence without treating a repository label as complete proof.
- Which files, generated assets, and revisions are expressly covered by the GPL declaration? boundary
- Who supplied the declaration, and what evidence supports their authority over the covered material? provenance
Exceptions and alternative grants
Represent additional permissions and alternative licensing paths without flattening them into bare GPL.
Qualified GPL grant
Attach exact exception or alternative-grant text to its issuer, material, and version scope.
- What exception, additional permission, or alternative license is documented for this material? provenance
- How does that wording change the proposed action, and does it apply to every relevant contribution? action
Copyleft boundary and compatibility Assess the scope of a covered work and the licensing feasibility of combinations.
Copyleft decisions depend on concrete relationships between components and exact grants.
Combined work boundary
Capture the facts needed to distinguish modification, combination, and aggregation.
Component relationship assessment
Treat technical integration as evidence for a documented boundary assessment, with unresolved legal interpretation recorded explicitly.
- How do the components link, exchange data, share structures, and depend on one another? boundary
- What evidence supports treating the result as a covered combined work or a mere aggregate? boundary
Combination license path
Evaluate a specific combination against the available versions and exceptions.
Compatible distribution terms
Record the proposed outbound terms and their justification for every component rather than assigning compatibility solely by license family.
- Which exact licenses, version choices, and exceptions govern the components being combined? provenance
- Can the proposed combination be distributed under terms satisfying all applicable grants, or is another permission required? action
Activity and delivery obligations Translate a proposed activity into a version-specific delivery assessment.
An agent needs concrete triggers, recipients, and evidence to assess what must accompany a GPL-covered release.
Activity trigger
Classify the transaction using the selected version's terminology.
Recipient and transfer
Record who receives copies and in what form, distinguishing copy transfer from execution or network interaction.
- Who receives a copy, through which transaction, and as source or object code? boundary
- Which clauses of the selected GPL version apply to this activity? action
Source and notice delivery
Check the release-specific materials and the selected source provision route.
Delivery evidence
Assess source completeness, license and change notices, delivery access, and any applicable GPLv3 Installation Information condition.
- Does the supplied source correspond to the delivered binary and include the materials required by the selected version? measurement
- What notices, source-offer terms, availability periods, and installation information must accompany this transaction? action
- What recipient-access checks establish that the selected delivery route actually works? measurement
Restrictions and grant standing Assess conflicting terms and maintain an evidence-based account of permission status.
Meeting source-delivery requirements alone does not settle every GPL condition or restore a terminated grant.
Conflicting obligations
Examine surrounding agreements and technical controls against the selected text.
Downstream restriction review
Record potentially conflicting contractual, patent, or technical conditions and identify the relevant version-specific analysis.
- Do accompanying agreements, patent arrangements, or device controls constrain recipients' exercise of the applicable GPL permissions? boundary
- Which terms or controls must change before the proposed distribution can satisfy the selected GPL version? action
Termination and remedy
Track alleged violations, corrective actions, and the basis for any reinstatement assessment.
Permission status evidence
Maintain status per relevant grant and recipient, with notices, dates, remedy evidence, and unresolved disputes.
- What conduct, dates, and communications support the current assessment of the grant's standing? provenance
- Under the applicable version, what further corrective action or rights-holder permission is needed before distribution resumes? action
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Check these first
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- This describes the license family; a particular software work's licensing depends on its stated version, any or-later permission, and applicable exceptions.
- Recall only: no sources were consulted; application to particular distribution, linking or deployment arrangements requires checking the relevant license text and facts.
- The boundary between separate works and a covered combined or derivative work is context-sensitive and should not be inferred solely from technical packaging.
- Which of these check these first hold for the sense of GNU General Public License this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Kinds and varieties
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- GNU GPL version 1
- GNU GPL version 2
- GNU GPL version 3
- Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of GNU General Public License this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Identifiers and schemes
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- SPDX License List - GPL-1.0-only - Identifies licensing under GPL version 1 only.
- SPDX License List - GPL-1.0-or-later - Identifies permission to use GPL version 1 or a later version.
- SPDX License List - GPL-2.0-only - Identifies licensing under GPL version 2 only.
- SPDX License List - GPL-2.0-or-later - Identifies permission to use GPL version 2 or a later version.
- SPDX License List - GPL-3.0-only - Identifies licensing under GPL version 3 only.
- SPDX License List - GPL-3.0-or-later - Identifies permission to use GPL version 3 or a later version.
- Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of GNU General Public License this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Standards and regulation
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- GNU General Public License versions 1, 2 and 3 - license texts published by the Free Software Foundation.
- SPDX License List and license expression syntax - maintained by the SPDX project for identifying licenses and expressing licensing choices.
- Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of GNU General Public License this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Real-world use
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Licensing free software, including GNU project software.
- Licensing the Linux kernel under GPL version 2 only, with explicitly documented exceptions.
- Redistributing modified software while preserving recipients' rights under the applicable GPL terms.
- Commercial distribution of software, including sales of copies and associated support.
- Recording software licensing in package metadata and software bills of materials.
- Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of GNU General Public License this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Failure modes and hazards
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Distributing binaries without satisfying the applicable version's corresponding source requirements.
- Removing required copyright notices or failing to provide required license notices and text.
- Combining or distributing code under incompatible licensing terms.
- Confusing a version-only grant with an or-later grant, or assuming all GPL versions are interchangeable.
- Assuming private modification requires public release, or assuming ordinary GPL licensing requires source disclosure merely because software is operated as a network service.
- Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of GNU General Public License this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Regional variation
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Copyright law and judicial interpretation vary by jurisdiction and can affect enforcement and the treatment of combined or modified works.
- Warranty exclusions and liability limitations operate subject to applicable local law.
- The Free Software Foundation treats translations as unofficial; the English text states the authoritative distribution terms.
- Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of GNU General Public License this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- GNU Lesser General Public License - Provides additional permissions allowing certain combinations with non-LGPL software, subject to conditions; ordinary GPL copyleft is more restrictive for such combinations.
- GNU Affero General Public License - Adds a source-offer requirement for users interacting remotely with a modified covered program over a network.
- MIT License - Is a permissive software license without the GPL's requirement to license covered distributed modifications under copyleft terms.
- GNU Free Documentation License - Is designed for documentation and other textual works, whereas the GPL is principally designed for software.
- GPL-licensed software - Is a work governed by the license; the GNU GPL itself is the reusable legal text defining permissions and conditions.
- Copyleft - Is a general licensing approach; the GNU GPL is a specific family of licenses implementing it.
- Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of GNU General Public License this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
What the second pass must settle
- Does the existing Vercy catalogue already contain an authoritative GPL model or software-license model that this registry entry should reference?
- Which authoritative GPLv1, GPLv2, and GPLv3 texts and translation-status records should anchor the publication's clause-level evidence?
- How should the model represent jurisdiction-dependent combined-work assessments when technical evidence does not settle the legal boundary?
- What evidence threshold should distinguish an agent's provisional compliance assessment from a rights-holder-confirmed resolution?
- How should contradictory file notices, missing version declarations, and partially documented exceptions remain actionable without inventing permission?