* Wrote most of GPL Section 0 Section

gpl-lgpl.tex

@@ -556,8 +556,10 @@ Like jazz, or novels, or architecture, the law gets built upon the work
 that went before. This adding and changing is what creativity always is.
 And a free society is one that assures that its most important resources
 remain free in just this sense.\footnote{This quotation is Copyright
-  \copyright{} 2002, Lawrence Lessig.  Verbatim copying of this quotation
-  in its entirety is permitted provided this notice is preserved.}
+  \copyright{} 2002, Lawrence Lessig.  It is licensed under the terms of
+  \href{http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/}{the ``Attribution
+    License'', version 1.0} or any later version as published by Creative
+  Commons.}
 \end{quotation}
 
 In essence, lawyers are paid to service the shared commons of legal
@@ -574,12 +576,97 @@ economy.
 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 \chapter{Copying, Modifying and Redistributing}
 
+This chapter begins the deep discussion of the details of the terms of
+GPL\@.  In this chapter, we consider the core terms: GPL \S\S 0--3.  These
+are the sections of the GPL that fundamentally define the legal details of
+how software freedom is respected.
+
+\section{GPL, \S 0: Freedom to Run}
+
+\S 0, the opening section of GPL, sets forth that the work is governed by
+copyright law.  It specifically points out that it is the ``copyright
+holder'' who decides if a work is licensed under its terms, and explains
+how the copyright holder might indicate this fact.
+
+A bit more subtly, \S 0 makes an inference that copyright law is the only
+system under which it is governed.  Specifically, it states:
+\begin{quote}
+Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
+covered by this License; they are outside its scope.
+\end{quote}
+In essence, the license governs \emph{only} those activites and all other
+activities are unrestricted, provided that no other agreements trump GPL
+(which they cannot; see Sections~\ref{GPLs6} and~\ref{GPLs7}).  This is
+very important, because the Free Software community heavily supports
+users' rights to ``fair use'' and ``unregulated use'' of copyrighted
+material.  GPL asserts through this clause that it supports users' rights
+to fair and unregulated uses.
+
+Fair use of copyrighted material is an established legal doctrine that
+permits certain activities.  Discussion of the various types of fair use
+activity are beyond the scope of this tutorial.  However, one important
+example of fair use is the right to reverse engineering software.
+
+Fair use is a doctrine established by the courts or by statute.  By
+contrast, unregulated uses are those that are not covered by the statue
+nor determined by a court to be covered, but are common and enjoyed by
+many users.  An example of unregulated use is reading a program like a
+novel for the purpose of learning how to be a better programmer.
+
+\medskip
+
+Thus, the GPL protects users fair and uregulated use rights precisely by
+not attempting to cover them.  Furthermore, the GPL ensures the freedom
+to run specifically by stating the following:
+\begin{quote}
+The act of running the Program is not restricted
+\end{quote}
+Thus, users are explicitly given the freedom to run by \S 0.
+
+\medskip
+
+The bulk of \S 0 not mentioned here gives definitions for other terms used
+throughout.  The only one worth discussing in detail is ``work based on
+the Program''.  The reason this definition is particular interesting is
+that 
+
+
+\section{GPL, \S 1}
+
+\section{GPL, \S 2}
+
+\section{GPL, \S 3}
+
 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 \chapter{Defending Freedom On Many Fronts}
 
+\section{GPL, Section 4}
+
+\section{GPL, Section 5}
+\label{GPLs5}
+
+\section{GPL, Section 6}
+\label{GPLs6}
+
+\section{GPL, Section 7}
+\label{GPLs7}
+
 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 \chapter{Odds, Ends, and Absolutely No Warranty}
 
+There was a case where the disclaimer of a contract was negated because it
+was not "conspicuous" to the person entering into the contract.  Therefore,
+to make such language "conspicuous" people started bolding it.  My question
+has always been, does that mean all the other parts of the document aren't
+important such that they too need to be "conspicuous."
+
+As for disclaiming warranties, remember that there are many types of
+warranties, and in some jurisdictions some of them cannot be disclaimed.
+Therefore, usually agreements will have both a warranty disclaimer and a
+limitation of liability.  The former gets rid of everything that can be
+gotten rid of, while the latter limits the liability of the actor for any
+warranties that cannot be disclaimed (such as personal injury, etc.).
+
 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 \chapter{Business Models, Internal Use, and Compliance}