Copyleft Compliance: mostly minor fixes to new pgs

These are mostly minor edits (typo fixes, etc.) to the enforcement
strategy and firmware liberation pages that were just added.

The one large change was to replace the first paragraph of the
enforcement strategy page with the full Conservancy description used
previously.  The glue text used to shorten it appeared unsalvageable
and it wasn't immediately obvious how to replace it with something
better, so we used the full description instead.

www/conservancy/static/copyleft-compliance/enforcement-strategy.html

@@ -6,7 +6,12 @@
 <h1 id="software-freedom-conservancy-proposal-for-gpl-enforcement-grant">History and Future Strategy</h1>
 
 <p>The Software Freedom Conservancy is a 501(c)(3) non-profit charity
-  registered in New York that continues it work in the are of important
+  registered in New York.  Founded in 2006, Conservancy helps people take control
+  of their computing by growing the software freedom movement, supporting
+  community-driven alternatives to proprietary software, and defending free
+  software with practical initiatives.  Conservancy accomplishes these goals
+  with various initiatives including fiscal sponsorship, licensing and project
+  governance policy, and public advocacy.  Some of Conservancy's most important
   licensing policy work involves defending and upholding the rights of
   software users and consumers under copyleft licenses, such as the GPL.</p>
 
@@ -24,7 +29,7 @@
   the router, but Linksys and Cisco had failed to provide source code or any
   offer for source code to its customers.</p>
 
-<p>A coalition formed including organizations and individuals — including
+<p>A coalition formed made up of organizations and individuals — including
   Erik Andersen (major contributor to and former leader of the BusyBox
   project) and Harald Welte (major contributor to Linux’s netfilter
   subsystem) — to enforce the
@@ -32,7 +37,7 @@
     M. Kuhn</a>, who is now Conservancy’s Policy Analyst and
   Hacker-in-Residence, led and coordinated that coalition when he was
   Executive Director of the FSF. By early 2004, this coalition, through the
-  process of GPL enforcement,compelled Linksys to release an
+  process of GPL enforcement, compelled Linksys to release an
   almost-GPL-compliant source release for the
   WRT54G. A <a href="https://openwrt.org/about/history">group of volunteers
     quickly built a new project, called OpenWRT</a> based on that source
@@ -115,10 +120,10 @@
 <p>There is one overarching irony to this growing dystopia: nearly all these
   devices are based primarily on software licensed under the GPL: most
   notably, Linux. While Linux-based systems do allow proprietary user-space
-  applications not licensed under GPL, the kernel (and many other system
+  applications not licensed under GPL, the kernel and many other system
   utilities routinely used in embedded systems, such as Conservancy’s BusyBox
-  project) are under that license (or similar copyleft licenses such as the
-  LGPL). These licenses require device markers to provide complete,
+  project, are under that license (or similar copyleft licenses such as the
+  LGPL). These licenses require device makers to provide complete,
   corresponding source code to everyone in possession of their
   devices. Furthermore, Linux’s specific license (GPL, version 2), mandates
   that source code must also include “the scripts used to control compilation
@@ -139,9 +144,9 @@
   solutions. E-recyclers
   like <a href="https://www.freegeek.org/">Freegeek</a> do this regularly for
   desktop and laptop machines with GNU/Linux distributions like Debian, and
-  with OpenWRT for wireless routers. We seek to assure they can do this for
+  with OpenWRT for wireless routers. We seek to ensure they can do this for
   other types of electronic products. However, without the complete,
-  corresponding source code and the scripts to control its compilation and
+  corresponding source code, including the scripts to control its compilation and
   installation, the fundamental purpose of copyleft is frustrated. Consumers,
   hobbyists, non-profit e-recyclers and the general public are left without
   the necessary tools they need and deserve, and which the license promises
@@ -168,7 +173,7 @@
 
 <p>“Internet of Things” firmware should never rely on one vendor — even the
   vendor of the hardware itself. This centralized approach is brittle and
-  inevitably leads to invasions of the public’s privacy and control of their
+  inevitably leads to invasions of the public’s privacy and loss of control of their
   technology. Conservancy’s GPL enforcement work is part of the puzzle that
   ensures users can choose who their devices connect to, and how they
   connect. Everyone deserves control over their own computing — from their
@@ -182,7 +187,7 @@
   Project for Linux Developers</h2>
 
 <p>In May 2012, Software Freedom Conservancy
-  formed <a href="https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/">The GPL
+  formed <a href="https://sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/#linux">The GPL
     Compliance Project for Linux Developers</a> in response to frustration by
   upstream Linux developers about the prevalence of noncompliance in the
   field, and their desire to stand with Conservancy’s BusyBox, Git and Samba
@@ -286,13 +291,13 @@
   in the unfunded work to make an MVP alternative firmware. While volunteer
   involvement remains essential to the success of alternative firmware
   projects, we know from our fiscal sponsorship work that certain aspects of
-  FOSS projects require an experienced charity to initiate and jump start
+  FOSS projects require an experienced charity to initiate and jump-start
   some of the less exciting aspects of FOSS project creation and
   development.</p>
 
 <p>Conservancy plans to select a specific class of device. Upon achieving
   compliant source releases in that subindustry through GPL enforcement,
-  Conservancy will <a href="firmware-liberation">launch an alternative
-  firmware project</> for that class of device.</p>
+  Conservancy will <a href="firmware-liberation.html">launch an alternative
+  firmware project</a> for that class of device.</p>
 
 {% endblock %}

www/conservancy/static/copyleft-compliance/firmware-liberation.html

@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
   projects.</p>
 
 <p>A coalition successfully enforced the GPL in this case, and Linksys
-  released source code A <a href="https://openwrt.org/about/history">group of
+  released source code. A <a href="https://openwrt.org/about/history">group of
     volunteers quickly built a new project, called OpenWRT</a> based on that
   source release. In the years that have followed, OpenWRT has been ported to
   almost every major wireless router product. Now, more than 15 years later,
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@
   cameras, police body cameras, cars, AV receivers, and televisions.</p>
 
 <p>This wide deployment of general purpose computers into mundane household
-  devices raises profound privacy and consumer rights
+  devices has profound privacy and consumer rights
   implications. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/15/us/Hacked-ring-home-security-cameras.html">Home</a> <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/01/23/family-says-hacked-nest-camera-warned-them-north-korean-missile-attack/">security</a> <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/06/05/617196788/s-c-mom-says-baby-monitor-was-hacked-experts-say-many-devices-are-vulnerable">cameras</a> <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/12/tech/ring-security-camera-hacker-harassed-girl-trnd/index.html">are</a> <a href="https://abc7.com/baby-monitor-hack-leads-to-kidnap-scare/4931822/">routinely</a> <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-44117337/security-footage-viewed-by-thousands">compromised</a>
   — invading the privacy and security of individual homes. Even when
   companies succeed in keeping out third parties, consumers
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@
 
 <p>“Internet of Things” firmware should never rely on one vendor — even the
   vendor of the hardware itself. This centralized approach is brittle and
-  inevitably leads to invasions of the public’s privacy and control of their
+  inevitably leads to invasions of the public’s privacy and loss of control of their
   technology. Conservancy plans to address this issue in the manner that the
   FOSS community knows best: put one foot in front of the other, and work to
   create FOSS for every possible task that users want to accomplish. For IoT
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@
   market.</p>
 
 <h3 id="demonstrating-the-power-of-software-freedom">Demonstrating the power
-  of software freedom,</h3>
+  of software freedom</h3>
 
 <p>To many, the benefits of software freedom are abstract. For less technical
   users, the idea of modifying or even reviewing the software on their
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@
 
 <p>When alternative firmware projects like OpenWRT exist for IoT devices,
   non-technical users can replace the software on their devices and benefit
-  from custom, community-controled software. Technical users are more likely
+  from custom, community-controlled software. Technical users are more likely
   to contribute knowing their efforts will be meaningful.</p>
 
 <p>However, decades of corporate involvement in copyleft have demonstrated
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@
   Enforcement</h2>
 
 <p><a href="enforcement-strategy.html">Conservancy plans to select a specific
-  violation and engage in litigation. Based on past experience, we expect
+  violation and engage in litigation.</a> Based on past experience, we expect
   that the press and attention to that ongoing litigation will yield
   increased responsiveness by violators throughout the industry. (A similar
   outcome occurred after our litigation in 2006.) This expected change in
@@ -142,9 +142,9 @@
   that certain aspects of FOSS projects require an experienced charity to
   initiate and jump-start some of the less exciting aspects of FOSS project
   creation and development. (In our last fiscal year, Conservancy funded 160
-  contributors to work on FOSS)</p>
+  contributors to work on FOSS.)</p>
 
-<p>In the initial phase of this grant, Conservancy will to select a specific
+<p>In the initial phase of this grant, Conservancy will select a specific
   class of device. Upon achieving compliant source releases in that
   subindustry through GPL enforcement, Conservancy will launch an alternative
   firmware project for that class of device.</p>
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@
   periods for a grassroots hobbyist activity is quite challenging; we seek to
   use this grant to bootstrap and catalyze interest and contribution to the
   project. Ideally, Conservancy would run the project with a single full-time
-  staffer for a about a year, and achieve a volunteer base sufficient to
+  staffer for about a year, and achieve a volunteer base sufficient to
   reduce funding to one part-time staffer.</p>
 
 <h3 id="criteria-for-device-selection">Criteria for Device Selection</h3>