60 lines
2.5 KiB
TeX
60 lines
2.5 KiB
TeX
|
\documentstyle[twocolumn]{article}
|
||
|
|
\pagestyle{empty}
|
||
|
|
\begin{document}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
%don't want date printed
|
||
|
|
\date{}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
%make title bold and 14 pt font (Latex default is non-bold, 16 pt)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
\title{\Large\bf A Comprehensive Consideration of Installation Requirements of the GPL}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
%for two authors (this is what is printed)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
\author{\begin{tabular}[t]{c@{\extracolsep{8em}}c@{\extracolsep{8em}}c}
|
||
|
|
Bradley M. Kuhn & Behan Webster \\
|
||
|
|
Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc. & Converse In Code
|
||
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
\thispagestyle{empty}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
\maketitle
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
\subsection*{\centering Abstract}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The GNU General License (``GPL'') is the most widely used \textit{copyleft}
|
||
|
|
license for software. Copyleft licenses function as copyright license in
|
||
|
|
atypical manner: rather than restricting permission to copy, modify and
|
||
|
|
redistribute the software, copyleft licenses encourage and enable such
|
||
|
|
activities. However, these license have strict requirements that mandate
|
||
|
|
further software sharing by enabling downstream users to easily improve,
|
||
|
|
modify, and upgrade the copylefted software on their own.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
GPL has two versions in common use: version 2 (``GPLv2'') and version 3
|
||
|
|
(``GPLv3''). Both versions require those who redistribute the software to
|
||
|
|
provide information related to the installation of software modified by
|
||
|
|
downstream. These installation requirements, however, differ somewhat in
|
||
|
|
their details. While some business practices around license compliance
|
||
|
|
efforts have reached adequate sophistication to address simpler compliance
|
||
|
|
problems, firms have generally given inadequate attention to the installation
|
||
|
|
requirements of both common versions of GPL\@. Misunderstanding of these
|
||
|
|
clauses is often common, and violations related to installation instructions
|
||
|
|
remain prevalent.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Furthermore, perceived differences in the requirements, and lack of rigorous
|
||
|
|
study of the Installation Information requirements of GPLv3\S6 has allowed
|
||
|
|
rumor and impression, rather than a textually grounded adherence to the
|
||
|
|
written rules, to govern industry response in adoption of software licensed
|
||
|
|
under GPLv3. The resulting scenario often causes redistributors to assume
|
||
|
|
the GPLv2 has \textbf{no} requirements regarding installation information,
|
||
|
|
and that GPLv3's requirements in this regard are impossible to meet,
|
||
|
|
particularly in security-conscious embedded products.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This paper explores the installation provisions of both common versions of
|
||
|
|
GPL, discusses historical motivations and context for each, and suggests best
|
||
|
|
practices regarding installation information for firms that redistribute
|
||
|
|
software under both licenses.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
\end{document}
|