deleted last clause of sec. 1; unnecessary given deletion of entity transactions provision

This commit deletes a sentence/paragraph in the definition of
"Corresponding Source" that was only needed because of the entity
transactions provision, which itself is now deleted.
simplified title of sec. 3

This commit simplifies the heading of section 3 to reduce it from
political chargedness to descriptiveness (without affecting the
content of the provision).

Historically, section 3 of GPLv3 was called "Digital Restrictions
Management", the FSF's reexpansion of DRM. Over time the provision,
once quite broad in scope, came to focus entirely on
anti-circumvention law.
simplified "void" clause of sec. 8

This commit simplifies the way the automatic termination clause is
worded in GPLv3 (and GPLv2). The use of "attempt" and "void" was never
necessary and arguably makes the clause less clear.
greatly simplified acceptance provision

Section 9 of GPLv3 originated as a provision titled "Not a
Contract". The mere title resulted in some objections by some European
lawyers and at least bemusement on the part of some American
lawyers. Curiously, though, the GPLv3 provision and its GPLv2
predecessor deal with acceptance, which is a contract law concept.

I believe the ancient "license vs. contract" debates concerning the
GPL were characterized by great confusion on all sides. There are some
interesting legal issues related to this which may be worth further
exploration. At this time, however, I accept the idea that the GPL
should have some sort of acceptance clause (as indeed many proprietary
software licenses and some free software licenses do), if only for
reasons of tradition, and that the FSF may intend for it to serve some
legal purpose that has nothing to do with acceptance in the contract
sense (or perhaps really does wish it to have some contract law
effect, traditional insistence that the GPL is "not a contract"
notwithstanding). What I have done here is simplified the title to
"Acceptance" and reduced the content of the provision to simply state
that modification or propagation are deemed to signify acceptance by
the licensee. I have kept the policy but trimmed the language to the
bare essentials.
deleted unnecessary T&C delimiters
deleted MS coupon provision

This commit deletes the paragraph in section 11 which was intended, as
a hack on a feature of the Microsoft/Novell deal of 2006, to cause
Microsoft patent licenses/covenants granted to Novell customers to be
"automatically extended" to all downstream recipients of the software
associated with the SLES certificates distributed by Microsoft
pursuant to the deal.

Historical evidence shows that this provision was taken somewhat
seriously, and its cleverness and creativity are to be
appreciated. However, it must be admitted that it has served no valid
purpose in the past five years. To my knowledge no one has ever
attempted to invoke the provision (or had need to invoke it) to argue
for the existence of a patent license or covenant, and it would be
exceedingly strange for anyone to have done so. The provision is
worded generally, but it is tied to one deal between two specific
companies and is intended to punish one particular company. Whatever
its political value was in early 2007, the provision today is either a
no-op or serves to intensify anti-GPLv3 FUD. It needs to go.

One can view this provision as a sort of odd exception to the
historical narrowing of the general patent license grant now contained
in paragraphs 1-3 of section 11. Early public drafts of GPLv3 had
featured a "pure distribution" approach to patent licensing. Whether
that narrowing of the patent license grant was good policy or not is
an open question, but it is worth noting that this anti-Microsoft
provision would have been pointless had a pure-distribution patent
licensing policy been retained.
modified final sentence of sec. 7

This commit simplifies and clarifies the final sentence/paragraph of
section 7. The concern here was uncertainty over the extent to which
the section 7 "allowed additional requirements" went beyond the
limited setting of compatibility with discrete free software
licenses. For example, section 7 notes that it is not a violation of
section 10 to supplement GPLv3 with a differently-worded warranty
disclaimer. The final sentence makes clear that this not only ratifies
the compatibility of differently-worded warranty disclaimers in
licenses traditionally treated as GPL-compatible, but also authorizes
an informal supplementation of the GPLv3 warranty disclaimer.

I changed "or stated as exceptions" to "or stated as exceptions to or
qualifications of", because the term "exception" in GPL contexts has
generally referred only to additional permissions, and application of
the term "exception" to an additional restriction seems confusing, at
least in light of this terminology tradition. (Cf. the original
license of Liberation Fonts.)
deleted section 17

This commit deletes a late change to GPLv3, the final section, which
had been drafted in response to arguments made by Axel Metzger
concerning the effects of the US-style warranty and liability
disclaimers under German law. While I like this provision, I must
wonder why it is necessary given that GPLv2 and other widely-used free
software licenses have gotten along fine without anything like it
(similar issues must arise with proprietary software licenses). It
should also be noted that Metzger's concerns may have resonance in US
law. Perhaps the better approach is to attempt improvement of the
disclaimers themselves, and/or to reconsider the idea, rejected early
on in the drafting of GPLv3, of a general severability clause.
fixed typo in title of sec. 13
Modified README.md, mainly to de-personalize it