This website is an archive. It was used for drafting and public consultation on GPLv3 and version 3 of other GNU licenses which were published in 2007. For up to date information, see https://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html. For more information about this archive, see https://www.fsf.org/licensing/gplv3-archive

From GPLv3 Wiki

I'm a little unclear on the upgrade path from GPLv2 to GPLv3. I started writing a FAQ entry dealing with the issue and took a shot at answering it. Is this answer accurate? Should this be added to the FAQ?

Q. I have a product that is currently licensed as "GPLv2, or higher--your choice." I am not the original copyright holder and I am not able to change the license. Am I allowed to, for example, statically link to an ASL 2.0 library in my program? This action is NOT allowed by the GPLv2, but IS allowed by the GPLv3.

A. Yes, this is allowed. As long as you are in compliance with GPLv2 OR GPLv3 (or possibly any future version) then you are ok. If the receiver of the program chooses to redistribute the program in compliance with the GPLv2, then they may remove the code that links to the ASL 2.0 library and redistribute to their heart's content (and license will still be "GPLv2 or higher").

For the same situation, what are the implementation details? I assume you would still distribute a LICENSE file containing the GPLv2. Would you also need to include another license file containing GPLv3? Should you state which parts of your code are only valid under GPLv3?

The inverse of this question could also be asked. For example:

Q. I am Tivo Inc, I'm using DRM to disallow end-users to change the software on their Tivo. This is allowed under GPLv2 but NOT allowed under GPLv3. Will I be allowed to continue linking with "GPLv2 or higher" software? Will I be allowed to link with "GPLv3 or higher" software?

A. Yes, you will be allowed to continue linked with "GPLv2 or higher" software. This right has been granted to you and can not be removed. If the software is relicensed as "GPLv3 or higher" then you may continue using your current version of the software, but you may not obtain a new version of the software from the upstream developers. Likewise, you can not link to any software licensed as "GPLv3 or higher."

Is this correct? Is this something that should be added to the FAQ? If so, Tivo should probably not be used as the example (I half-fabricated that example).