{"id":"GPL-1.0-or-later","title":"GNU General Public License v1.0 or later","reviewed_on":"2026-09-22","reviewer":"Giray Havur","text_source":"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/spdx/license-list-data/main/text/GPL-1.0-or-later.txt","text_retrieved":true,"verdict":"created","summary":"The record models the \"or later\" form of the first version of the GNU General Public License. Its legal text is the same document that GPL-1.0-only models, so the deontic model is that record statement for statement. What the identifier adds is the option section 7 gives the licensee to follow version 1 or any later version the Free Software Foundation publishes, which in practice means GPL version 2 or version 3.","findings":[{"rubric":1,"severity":"info","field":"spdx:licenseId","description":"File name, record id, SPDX identifier and the local name of the IRI are all GPL-1.0-or-later. The deprecated short form GPL-1.0+ is carried as a dct:alternative so that a search for it reaches this record.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":10,"severity":"major","field":"dalicc:variantOf","description":"The record copies GPL-1.0-only statement for statement. Five things differ: the identifier, dct:title, dct:alternative, dalicc:orLaterVersionOption (true here, false there) and the pair dalicc:variantKind \"version-option\" with dalicc:variantOf dalicclib:GPL-1.0-only. Everything else, including the three quoted clauses and the four statements that set the pair apart from the GPL version 2 records, is carried over unchanged.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":7,"severity":"major","field":"dalicc:orLaterVersionOption","description":"Section 7 is the clause the flag stands for: \"If the Program specifies a version number of the license which applies to it and \"any later version\", you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.\" The same section adds that where the program names no version at all, \"you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation\". cc:jurisdiction stays dalicc:worldwide and dalicc:validityType stays dalicc:perpetual.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":3,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:permission","description":"The permissions are those of the base record and come from the same sentences: section 1 (verbatim copies of the source, and a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy), section 2 (modification and distribution of the modified work) and section 3 (object code or executable form).","action":"applied"},{"rubric":5,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:duty","description":"cc:ShareAlike is a duty of the licence itself, from section 2(b), and the attribution, notice and source-code duties hang on distribute, modify and derive, with dalicc:modificationNotice on modify and derive from section 2(a). Nothing moved when the model was copied.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":4,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:prohibition","description":"The four prohibitions of the base record are kept: dalicc:ChangeLicense from section 2(b), dalicc:addLimitation from section 6, dalicc:sublicense from section 4, and dalicc:promote, which is the library-wide default and is not supported by this text.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":6,"severity":"info","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"The warranty disclaimer of section 9, the limitation of liability of section 10, the fee and warranty sentence of section 2(d) and the three quoted clauses (sections 2(c), 4 and 6) are byte for byte the literals of GPL-1.0-only, because the text is the same document.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":2,"severity":"info","field":"odrl:target","description":"The asset collection carries dcmitype:Software, as in the base record.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":9,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"The consistency check of app.services.composer, run with licensedata/dependencygraph/dg_default.ttl, reports 0 conflicts for this record.","action":"none"},{"rubric":8,"severity":"gap","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"The gaps are those of the base record: the interactive announcement of section 2(c), for which no duty action exists (proposed term dalicc:interactiveNotice), and the automatic downstream licence of section 6, which dalicc:downstreamOffer nearly covers but which asks nothing of the licensee. Both are quoted in dalicc:additionalClauses.","action":"none"},{"rubric":4,"severity":"minor","field":"odrl:prohibition","description":"dalicc:promote was prohibited and no sentence of this text supports it. The statement was the library's reading of a legal default, that a copyright licence which says nothing about endorsement grants no right to it, and it sat in 519 of 581 records as a house convention. That reading is now an adopted dalicc:DefaultRule of the core dependency graph, which supplies it to every licence that is silent about the action, so a compatibility check reaches the same answer and the record states only what the text states. Removed on 2026-09-23; see section 13 of docs/LICENSE_REVIEW.md.","action":"applied","change":"# removed\nodrl:prohibition [ a odrl:Prohibition ;\n        odrl:action dalicc:promote ] ;\n"}],"family":"GNU copyleft family (GPL, LGPL, AGPL, FDL)","port_of":null,"variant_kind":"version-option","variant_of":"GPL-1.0-only","notes":"A licensee who takes the later-version option under this identifier ends up under GPL version 2 or version 3, whose records model those texts. The record says only that the option exists; it does not try to model the terms of the version the licensee may move to."}