Copyleft/guide
6
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Added GPL3 article by Moglen and Stallman, added schedule and bios, fixed broken URL.

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
John Sullivan 2005-09-26 22:15:53 +00:00 • committed by Bradley M. Kuhn
parent 04ffc89b8f
commit 1f05cd5515
1 changed files with 278 additions and 69 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

347
gpl-lgpl.tex
View file

@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
% gpl-lgpl.tex -*- LaTeX -*-
% Tutorial Text for the Detailed Study and Analysis of GPL and LGPL course
%
% Copyright (C) 2003, 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
% Copyright (C) 2003, 2004, 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
% Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire document is permitted in
% any medium, provided this notice is preserved.
@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
\vfill
{\Large
{\sc Detailed Study and Analysis of the GPL and LGPL } \\
{\sc The GPL and Legal Aspects of Free Software Development } \\
\vfill
@ -47,25 +47,14 @@
% \vspace{.3in}
Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA \\
Columbia Law School, New York, NY, USA \\
\vspace{.1in}
Tuesday, 24 August 2004
Wednesday, 28 September 2005
}
%\vspace{.7in}
\vfill
{\large
Bradley M. Kuhn
Executive Director
Free Software Foundation
}
\vspace{.3in}
{\large
Daniel Ravicher
@ -76,7 +65,17 @@ Free Software Foundation
President and Executive Director
Public Patent Foundation
}
\vspace{.3in}
{\large
David Turner
GPL Compliance Engineer
Free Software Foundation
}
\end{center}
@ -84,7 +83,7 @@ Public Patent Foundation
\vfill
{\parindent 0in
Copyright \copyright{} 2003, 2004 \hspace{.2in} Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Copyright \copyright{} 2003, 2004, 2005 \hspace{.2in} Free Software Foundation, Inc.
\vspace{.3in}
@ -98,79 +97,98 @@ any medium, provided this notice is preserved.
\pagenumbering{roman}
\chapter*{Detailed Study and Analysis of the GPL and LGPL}
\chapter*{The GPL and Legal Aspects of Free Software Development}
\textit{Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 24 August 2004}
\textit{Columbia Law School, New York, NY, 28 September 2005}
\begin{tabular}[t]{ll}
09:00 - 09:25 & Registration / Check-in / Continental Breakfast\\
&\\
09:25 - 09:30 & Welcome\\
&\\
09:30 - 10:00 & Free Software Principles and the Free Software Definition\\
& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
09:30 - 10:30 & The Basics of How Software is Constructed\\
& \textit{David Turner}\\
&\\
10:00 - 10:10 & Preamble of the GNU General Public License (GPL)\\
& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
10:30 - 11:15 & The Free Software Ecosystem\\
& \textit{David Turner}\\
&\\
10:10 - 10:35 & GPL, \S 0: Definitions, etc.\\
& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
11:15 - 11:30 & Break\\
&\\
10:35 - 10:50 & GPL, \S 1: Grant for Verbatim Source Copying\\
& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
&\\
10:50 - 11:00 & Q \& A\\
&\\
11:00 - 11:10 & Break\\
&\\
11:10 - 11:55 & Derivative Works: Statute and Case Law\\
11:30 - 12:15 & How Copyright Law Applies to Software\\
& \textit{Daniel Ravicher}\\
&\\
12:15 - 13:30 & Lunch with Lecture, ``GPL, Version 3''\\
& \textit{Prof. Eben Moglen}\\
&\\
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}[t]{ll}
11:55 - 12:20 & GPL, \S 2: Grants for Source Derivative Works\\
& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
&\\
12:20 - 12:30 & Q \& A\\
&\\
12:30 - 14:00 & Lunch with Lecture "Patents and Free Software"\\
& \textit{Prof. Eben Moglen}\\
&\\
14:00 - 14:20 & GPL, \S 3 Grants for Creating Binary Derivative Works\\
& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
&\\
14:20 - 14:40 & The Implied Patent Grant in the GPL\\
13:30 - 15:30 & How the GPL Works from a Distributor Perspective\\
& \textit{Daniel Ravicher}\\
&\\
14:40 - 15:25 & GPL, \S 4: Termination of License\\
& GPL, \S 5: Acceptance of License\\
& GPL, \S 6: Prohibition on Further Restrictions\\
& GPL, \S 7: Conflicts with other Agreements or Orders\\
& GPL, \S 8: International Licensing Issues\\
& GPL, \S 10: Copyright Holder's Exceptions to the GPL\\
& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
15:30 - 15:45 & Break\\
&\\
15:25 - 15:35 & GPL, \S 11: Disclaimer of Warranties\\
& GPL, \S 12: Limitation of Liability\\
15:45 - 17:15 & GPL Compliance\\
& \textit{Daniel Ravicher}\\
&\\
15:35 - 15:45 & Q \& A\\
17:15 - 18:00 & Future ConsiderationsGNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL)\\
& \textit{Daniel Ravicher}\\
&\\
15:45 - 16:00 & Break\\
&\\
16:00 - 17:30 & GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL)\\
& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
&\\
17:30 - 18:00 & Q \& A\\
\end{tabular}
\chapter*{About the Speakers}
\section*{Eben Moglen}
Eben Moglen is Professor of Law and Legal History at Columbia
University Law School and General Counsel of the Free Software
Foundation. Professor Moglen earned his PhD in History and law degree
at Yale University during what he sometimes calls his "long, dark
period" in New Haven. After law school he clerked for Judge Edward
Weinfeld of the United States District Court in New York City and to
Justice Thurgood Marshall of the United States Supreme Court. He has
taught at Columbia Law School -- and has held visiting appointments at
Harvard University, Tel-Aviv University and the University of Virginia
-- since 1987. In 2003 he was given the Electronic Frontier
Foundation's Pioneer Award for efforts on behalf of freedom in the
electronic society.
\section*{Daniel Ravicher}
Dan Ravicher is a registered patent attorney with extensive experience
litigating, licensing, prosecuting, and otherwise counseling clients
with respect to patents. Prior to founding PUBPAT, Mr. Ravicher was
associated with the patent law practice groups of Skadden, Arps,
Slate, Meagher \& Flom LLP, Brobeck, Phleger \& Harrison, LLP, and
Patterson, Belknap, Webb \& Tyler, LLP, all in New York, and served the
Honorable Randall R. Rader, Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. Mr. Ravicher has
published several legal articles and given numerous presentations
regarding patent law. Mr. Ravicher received his law degree from the
University of Virginia School of Law, where he was the Class of 2000
Franklin O'Blechman Scholar, a Mortimer Caplin Public Service Award
recipient and Editor of the Virginia Journal of Law and Technology,
and his bachelors degree in materials science magna cum laude with
University Honors from the University of South Florida.
\section*{David Turner}
David Turner has been a GNU GPL Compliance Engineer for the Free
Software Foundation for three and a half years. Mr. Turner consults
with companies and individuals about free software licensing in
general, focusing on the FSF's licenses. Mr. Turner has given
presentations on the GPL around the world. In addition, Mr. Turner
has written software to help manage copyright assignments and
determine copyright ownership. He has experience with several
languages including C, Python, Perl and Java. Mr. Turner is presently
working on the next version of the GNU GPL.
\chapter*{Preface}
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'd software) successfully in a new Free
This one-day course gives an 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'd software) successfully in a new Free
Software business and in existing, successful enterprises.
Attendees should have a general familiarity with software development
@ -274,7 +292,7 @@ Source.'' Besides having a different political focus than those who
call it Free Software,\footnote{The political differences between the
Free Software Movement and the Open Source Movement are documented
on FSF's Web site at {\tt
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html}.}
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-software-for-freedom.html}.}
those who call the software ``Open Source'' are focused on a side
issue. User access to the source code of a program is a prerequisite
to make use of the freedom to modify. However, the important issue is
@ -3792,16 +3810,16 @@ the limitation as if written in the body of this License.
\textbf{Affero Inc. may publish revised and/or new versions of the Affero
General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will be
similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to
address new problems or concerns.
address new problems or concerns.}
Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program
\textbf{Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program
specifies a version number of this 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
Affero, Inc. If the Program does not specify a version number of this
License, you may choose any version ever published by Affero, Inc.
License, you may choose any version ever published by Affero, Inc.}
You may also choose to redistribute modified versions of this program
\textbf{You may also choose to redistribute modified versions of this program
under any version of the Free Software Foundation's GNU General Public
License version 3 or higher, so long as that version of the GNU GPL
includes terms and conditions substantially equivalent to those of
@ -3848,6 +3866,197 @@ possibility of such damages.}
That's all there is to it!
\chapter{GPL Version 3: Background to Adoption}
\textbf{\textit{\large{by Richard Stallman and Eben Moglen}}}
\smallskip
The GNU General Public License (``the GPL'') has remained
unmodified, at version level 2, since 1991. This is extraordinary
longevity for any widely-employed legal instrument. The durability of
the GPL is even more surprising when one takes into account the
differences between the free software movement at the time of version
2's release and the situation prevailing in 2005.
Richard M. Stallman, founder of the free software movement and author
of the GNU GPL, released version 2 in 1991 after taking legal advice
and collecting developer opinion concerning version 1 of the license,
which had been in use since 1985. There was no formal public comment
process and no significant interim transition period. The Free
Software Foundation immediately relicensed the components of the GNU
Project, which comprised the largest then-existing collection of
copyleft software assets. In Finland, Linus Torvalds adopted GPL
Version 2 for his operating system kernel, called Linux.
That was then, and this is now. The GPL is employed by tens of
thousands of software projects around the world, of which the Free
Software Foundation's GNU system is a tiny fraction. The GNU system,
when combined with Linus Torvalds' Linux---which has evolved into a
flexible, highly-portable, industry-leading operating system kernel
--- along with Samba, MySQL, and other GPL'd programs, offers superior
reliability and adaptability to Microsoft's operating systems, at
nominal cost. GPL'd software runs on or is embedded in devices
ranging from cellphones, PDAs and home networking appliances to
mainframes and supercomputing clusters. Independent software
developers around the world, as well as every large corporate IT buyer
and seller, and a surprisingly large proportion of individual users,
interact with the GPL.
During the period since 1991, of course, there has developed a
profusion of free software licenses. But not in the area covered by
the GPL. The ``share and share alike'' or ``copyleft'' aspect of the
GPL is its most important functional characteristic, and those who
want to use a copyleft license for software overwhelmingly use the GPL
rather than inventing their own.
Updating the GPL is therefore a very different task in 2005 than it
was in 1991. The substantive reasons for revision, and the likely
nature of those changes, are subject matter for another essay. At
present we would like to concentrate on the institutional, procedural
aspects of changing the license. Those are complicated by the fact
that the GPL serves four distinct purposes.
\section*{The GPL is a Worldwide Copyright License}
As a legal document, the GPL serves a purpose that most legal drafters
would do anything possible to avoid: it licenses copyrighted material
for modification and redistribution in every one of the world's
systems of copyright law. In general, publishers don't use worldwide
copyright licenses; for each system in which their works are
distributed, licensing arrangements tailored to local legal
requirements are used. Publishers rarely license redistribution of
modified or derivative works; when they do so, those licenses are
tailored to the specific setting, factual and legal. But free
software requires legal arrangements that permit copyrighted works to
follow arbitrary trajectories, in both geographic and genetic terms.
Modified versions of free software works are distributed from hand to
hand across borders in a pattern that no copyright holder could
possibly trace.
GPL version 2 performed the task of globalization relatively well,
because its design was elegantly limited to a minimum set of copyright
principles that signatories to the Berne Convention must offer, in one
form or another, in their national legislation. But GPL2 was a
license constructed by one US layman and his lawyers, largely
concerned with US law. To the extent possible, and without any
fundamental changes, GPL3 should ease internationalization
difficulties, more fully approximating the otherwise unsought ideal of
the global copyright license.
\section*{The GPL is the Code of Conduct for Free Software Distributors}
Beyond the legal permission that the GPL extends to those who wish to
copy, modify, and share free software, the GPL also embodies a code of
industry conduct with respect to the practices by which free software
is distributed. Section 3, which explains how to make source code
available as required under the license, affects product packaging
decisions for those who embed free software in appliances, as well as
those who distribute software collections that include both free and
unfree software. Section 7, which concerns the effect of licenses,
judgments, and other compulsory legal interventions incompatible with
the GPL on the behavior of software distributors, affects patent
licensing arrangements in connection with industry standards. And so
on, through a range of interactions between the requirements of the
license and evolving practices in the vending of both hardware and
software.
The Free Software Foundation, through its maintenance and enforcement
of the GPL, has contributed to the evolution of industry behavior
patterns beyond its influence as a maker of software. In revising the
GPL, the Foundation is inevitably engaged in altering the rules of the
road for enterprises and market participants of many different kinds,
with different fundamental interests and radically different levels of
market power. The process of drafting and adopting changes to the
license must thus approximate standard-setting, or ``best practices''
definition, as well as copyright license drafting.
\section*{The GPL is the Constitution of the Free Software Movement}
The Free Software Foundation has never been reluctant to point out
that its goals are primarily social and political, not technical or
economic. The Foundation believes that free software---that is,
software that can be freely studied, copied, modified, reused,
redistributed and shared by its users---is the only ethically
satisfactory form of software development, as free and open scientific
research is the only ethically satisfactory context for the conduct of
mathematics, physics, or biology. The Foundation, and those who
support its broader work, regard free software as an essential step in
a social movement for freer access to knowledge, freer access to
facilities of communication, and a more deeply participatory culture,
open to human beings with less regard to existing distributions of
wealth and social power. The free software movement has taken
advantage of the social conditions of its time to found its program on
the creation of vast new wealth, through new systems of cooperation,
which can in turn be shared in order to further the creation of new
wealth, in a positive feedback loop.
This program is not, of course, universally shared by all the parties
who benefit from the exploitation of the new wealth created by free
software. The free software movement has never objected to the
indirect benefits accruing to those who differ from the movement's
goals: one of the powerful lessons the movement has learned from
previous aspects of the long-duration Western movement for freedom of
expression is the value of working with, rather than against,
conventional economic interests and concerns. But the movement's own
goals cannot be subordinated to the economic interests of our friends
and allies in industry, let alone those who occasionally contribute
solely for reasons of their own. Changes to the GPL, for whatever
reason they are undertaken, must not undermine the underlying movement
for freer exchange of knowledge. To the extent that the movement has
identified technological or legal measures likely to be harmful to
freedom, such as ``trusted computing'' or a broadening of the scope of
patent law, the GPL needs to address those issues from a perspective
of political principle and the needs of the movement, not from primary
regard for the industrial or commercial consequences.
\section*{The GPL is the Literary Work of Richard M.\ Stallman}
Some copyright licenses are no doubt known, in the restricted circle
of one firm or law office, as the achievement of a single author's
acumen or insight. But it is safe to say that there is no other
copyright license in the world that is so strongly identified with the
achievements, and the philosophy, of a single public figure. Mr.\
Stallman remains the GPL's author, with as much right to preserve its
integrity as a work representative of his intentions as any other
author or creator. Under his guidance, the Free Software Foundation,
which holds the copyright of the GPL, will coordinate and direct the
process of its modification.
\section*{Conclusion}
The GPL serves, and must continue to serve, multiple purposes. Those
purposes are fundamentally diverse, and they inevitably conflict.
Development of GPL version 3 has been an ongoing process within the
Free Software Foundation; we, along with our colleagues, have never
stopped considering possible modifications. We have consulted,
formally and informally, a very broad array of participants in the
free software community, from industry, the academy, and the garage.
Those conversations have occurred in many countries and several
languages, over almost two decades, as the technology of software
development and distribution changed around us.
When a GPLv3 discussion draft is released, the pace of that
conversation will change, as a particular proposal becomes the
centerpiece. The Foundation will, before it emits a first discussion
draft, publicize the process by which it intends to gather opinion and
suggestions. The Free Software Foundation recognizes that the
reversioning of the GPL is a crucial moment in the evolution of the
free software community, and the Foundation intends to meet its
responsibilities to the makers, distributors and users of free
software. In doing so, we hope to hear all relevant points of view,
and to make decisions that reflect the many disparate purposes that
the license must serve. Our primary concern remains, as it has been
from the beginning, the creation and protection of freedom. We
recognize that the best protection of freedom is a growing and vital
community of the free. We will use the process of public discussion
of GPL3 drafts to support and nurture the community of the free.
Proprietary culture imposes both technology and license terms; free
software means allowing people to understand, experiment and modify
software, as well as getting involved in the discussion of license
terms, so that everyone's ideas can contribute to the common good, and
the development of each contributes to the development of all.
% =====================================================================
% END OF FIRST DAY SEMINAR SECTION
% =====================================================================