181 lines
8.4 KiB
Text
181 lines
8.4 KiB
Text
|
Detailed Study and Analysis of GPL and LGPL
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This one-day course gives a section-by-section explanation of the most
|
||
|
|
popular Free Software copyright license, the GNU General Public License
|
||
|
|
(GNU GPL), and teaches lawyers, software developers, managers and business
|
||
|
|
people how to use the GPL (and GPL'ed software) successfully in a new Free
|
||
|
|
Software business and in existing, successful enterprises.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Prerequisites:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Attendees should have a general familiarity with software development
|
||
|
|
processes. A basic understanding of how copyright law typically
|
||
|
|
applies to software is also helpful.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Audience:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The course is of most interest to lawyers, software developers and
|
||
|
|
managers who run (or have clients who run) software businesses that
|
||
|
|
modify and/or redistribute software under terms of the GNU GPL or
|
||
|
|
LGPL, or who wish to make use of existing GPL'd and LGPL'd software
|
||
|
|
in their enterprise.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The course will include the topics listed below, along with ample time for
|
||
|
|
questions and discussions. Lunch is included, with a lunch speaker to be
|
||
|
|
announced.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* Free Software Principles and the Free Software Definition
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The ethical principles that motivated the creation of these licenses
|
||
|
|
are presented. Unlike licenses that seek to lock up software in a
|
||
|
|
proprietary fashion, the GPL and LGPL are designed to grant freedom to
|
||
|
|
innovate, learn and improve. Those principles influence licensing
|
||
|
|
policy decisions. We present the specific definition of the concept
|
||
|
|
of "Free Software" (software whose license grants freedoms to copy,
|
||
|
|
share, modify and redistribute the software either gratis or for a
|
||
|
|
fee) for-profit companies.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* Preamble of the GNU General Public License (GPL)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The preamble presents the intent of the license. The preamble puts
|
||
|
|
forth the motivations for the detailed terms and conditions that
|
||
|
|
follow in the license. We discuss the language of the preamble in
|
||
|
|
detail to show how it frames the legal details that follow.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 0: Definitions, etc.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
GPL's section 0 defines and presents the terms that make the basis of
|
||
|
|
this copyright license. We discuss those definitions and the
|
||
|
|
copyright scope of the license.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 1: Grant for Verbatim Source Copying
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Section 1 defines the terms for making source-only copies of software
|
||
|
|
programs. We discuss how those rules work and the requirements and
|
||
|
|
obligations for distributors of GPL'd source, whether they choose to
|
||
|
|
distribute at no charge or for fees.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* Derivative Works: Statute and Case Law
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Free Software licensing in general, and the GPL and LGPL in
|
||
|
|
particular, relies critically on the concept of derivative work since
|
||
|
|
software that is independent (i.e., not derivative) of Free Software
|
||
|
|
need not abide by any of the terms of the applicable Free Software
|
||
|
|
license. If a work is a derivative work of Free Software, then the
|
||
|
|
terms of the license are triggered, and one has obligations to comply
|
||
|
|
with the terms of the Free Software license under which the original
|
||
|
|
work is distributed. Therefore, one is left to ask, just what is a
|
||
|
|
"derivative work?" We will show how the answer to that question
|
||
|
|
depends on which court is being asked. We also present the best
|
||
|
|
background information available to build a working understanding of
|
||
|
|
what is generally considered a derivate work in the rapidly changing
|
||
|
|
field of software copyright law.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 2: Grants for Source Derivative Works
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Section 2 sets forth the rules for creation of derivative works of
|
||
|
|
GPL'd software. We discuss the intent of this section of GPL and how
|
||
|
|
it relates to the copyright situation discussed in our discussion of
|
||
|
|
derivative works. We also explain the details of preparing derivative
|
||
|
|
source in a GPL-compliant way.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 3: Grants for Creating Binary Derivative Works
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Source-only distribution works well for technically savvy clients and
|
||
|
|
users, but most want runnable binary programs as well. Section 3
|
||
|
|
gives permission for the creation and distribution of such binary
|
||
|
|
works. We explain how GPL's requirement for corresponding source code
|
||
|
|
operate, and detail what distribution options are available to
|
||
|
|
distributors of binary GPL'd software. We explore the benefits and
|
||
|
|
downsides of each of those options.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* The Implied Patent Grant in GPL
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Patent rights are most often granted expressly, through detailed
|
||
|
|
language in a license. However, express patent grants are not the
|
||
|
|
exclusive way rights in patents are granted by patentees. Even
|
||
|
|
without express language, patent rights can be granted by a patentee's
|
||
|
|
actions or behavior. The GPL contains no express patent grant. Does
|
||
|
|
that mean it grants less rights in the licensor's patents than other
|
||
|
|
licenses which do? Or, does the GPL, in its silence, actually result
|
||
|
|
in a grant of patent rights to the licensee greater than occurs
|
||
|
|
through many other Free Software and "Open Source" licenses?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We will consider these questions and provide detailed answers to them.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 4: Termination of License
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Section 4 terminates rights under GPL for those who violate it. We
|
||
|
|
discuss how such termination works, what it means for violators, what
|
||
|
|
risks one takes in violating, and how rights are typically restored.
|
||
|
|
We briefly mention how Section 4 is used as the central tool in GPL
|
||
|
|
enforcement.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 5: Acceptance of License
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
GPL is not a contract, so acceptance of the license works differently
|
||
|
|
than it does for contracts. We discuss how this acceptance works
|
||
|
|
under the copyright rules that govern GPL.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 6: Prohibition on Further Restrictions
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Other licensing terms cannot be placed on GPL'd software that would
|
||
|
|
trump the rights granted under GPL. We discuss how Section 6 is used
|
||
|
|
to ensure that no such additional restrictions occur. We briefly
|
||
|
|
discuss how this leads to the concept of GPL-incompatible Free
|
||
|
|
Software licenses.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 7: Conflicts with other Agreements or Orders
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Just as additional licensing restrictions cannot trump GPL, outside
|
||
|
|
agreements, patent licenses or court orders cannot do so either. We
|
||
|
|
discuss how Section 7 ensures that other rules outside of the direct
|
||
|
|
software license cannot take rights away from users, distributors, and
|
||
|
|
modifiers of GPL'd software.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 8: International Licensing Issues
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Section 8 is rarely used part of the GPL that helps copyright holders
|
||
|
|
when certain technologies are prohibited from full international
|
||
|
|
distribution due to draconian rules elsewhere in the world. We
|
||
|
|
explain how Section 8 helps such copyright holders.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 9: FSF as GPL's Stewards
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We discuss how the update process and release of new GPL versions
|
||
|
|
happens.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 10: Copyright Holder's Exceptions to GPL
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Section 10 reminds licensees that under copyright law, other
|
||
|
|
relicensing arrangements can be made. We discuss how this can often
|
||
|
|
be used as a business model and we explicate that model's benefits and
|
||
|
|
downsides.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* GPL, Section 11: Disclaimer of Warranties
|
||
|
|
GPL, Section 12: Limitation of Liability
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Almost all software licenses, including Free Software licenses such as
|
||
|
|
the GPL, contain sections, typically in all caps, regarding warranties
|
||
|
|
and liability. The purposes of these sections are lost on most
|
||
|
|
non-lawyers, but attorneys understand the importance their language
|
||
|
|
provides to both the licensor and the licensee. Some have argued that
|
||
|
|
the GPL's Sections 11 and 12 render it entirely unenforceable. We
|
||
|
|
consider whether that is true, and present the likely interpretation
|
||
|
|
and implementation of the GPL's Warranty Disclaimer and Liability
|
||
|
|
Limitation provisions.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
* Lesser General Public License (LGPL)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The LGPL is a "scaled back" version of GPL, designed specifically to
|
||
|
|
allow creation of a very well-defined class of proprietary derivative
|
||
|
|
works. However, it does prohibit turning the LGPL'd software itself
|
||
|
|
directly into proprietary software.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We discuss the basic design of LGPL and how it compares and contrasts
|
||
|
|
with GPL. We introduce the two classes of derivative works covered
|
||
|
|
by LGPL -- "works that use the library" and "works based on the
|
||
|
|
library" -- and give some concrete examples of what proprietary
|
||
|
|
derivative works are prohibited and permitted when basing the
|
||
|
|
software on an LGPL'd work.
|