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

Replace ’ with '.

Browse source 
The unicode ’ was introduced by the pasted text mention in the previous
commits.  While I believe LaTeX can be configured to accept Unicode
quote equivalents, it seems simpler to me merely to replace the
character with an appropriate version that LaTeX expects in this
situation by default.
This commit is contained in:
Bradley M. Kuhn 2014-11-13 12:48:25 -05:00
parent 9f34658440
commit 954f35615d
2 changed files with 24 additions and 24 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

18
compliance-guide.tex
View file

@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ Online service providers and distributors alike have other compliance
obligations. In general, they must refrain from imposing any additional obligations. In general, they must refrain from imposing any additional
restrictions on downstream parties. Most typically, such compliance problems restrictions on downstream parties. Most typically, such compliance problems
arise from ``umbrella licenses:'' EULAs, or sublicenses that restrict arise from ``umbrella licenses:'' EULAs, or sublicenses that restrict
downstream users’ rights under copyleft. (See \S~\ref{GPLv2s6} and downstream users' rights under copyleft. (See \S~\ref{GPLv2s6} and
\S~\ref{GPLv3s10}). \S~\ref{GPLv3s10}).
Patent holders having claims reading on GPL'd works they distribute must Patent holders having claims reading on GPL'd works they distribute must
@ -252,9 +252,9 @@ software in the company's products.
Fortunately, COGEOs regard GPL compliance failures as an opportunity to Fortunately, COGEOs regard GPL compliance failures as an opportunity to
improve compliance. Every compliance failure downstream represents a loss of improve compliance. Every compliance failure downstream represents a loss of
rights by their users. The COGEOs are the guardian of its users’ and rights by their users. The COGEOs are the guardian of its users' and
developers' rights. Their activity seeks to restore those rights, and developers' rights. Their activity seeks to restore those rights, and
to protect the project’s contributors’ intentions in the making of their to protect the project's contributors' intentions in the making of their
software. software.
\chapter{Best Practices to Avoid Common Violations} \chapter{Best Practices to Avoid Common Violations}
@ -341,7 +341,7 @@ of the GPL violations ever encountered:
incomplete, or is not delivered at all). incomplete, or is not delivered at all).
\item Requestors are ignored when they communicate with violator's published \item Requestors are ignored when they communicate with violator's published
addresses requesting fulfillment of businesses’ obligations. addresses requesting fulfillment of businesses' obligations.
\end{itemize} \end{itemize}
This tutorial therefore focuses primarily on these issue. This tutorial therefore focuses primarily on these issue.
@ -497,7 +497,7 @@ that the full license text must accompany every distribution (either in
source or binary form) of each licensed work. Strangely, this requirement is source or binary form) of each licensed work. Strangely, this requirement is
responsible for a surprisingly significant fraction of compliance errors; too responsible for a surprisingly significant fraction of compliance errors; too
often, physical products lack required information about the presence of often, physical products lack required information about the presence of
GPL’d programs and the applicable license terms. Automated build processes GPL'd programs and the applicable license terms. Automated build processes
can and should carry a copy of the license from the the source distribution can and should carry a copy of the license from the the source distribution
into the final binary firmware package for embedded products. Such into the final binary firmware package for embedded products. Such
automation usually achieves compliance regarding license inclusion automation usually achieves compliance regarding license inclusion
@ -1229,8 +1229,8 @@ contradict this permission.
Thus, under the terms of LGPL, you must refrain from license terms on works Thus, under the terms of LGPL, you must refrain from license terms on works
based on the licensed work that prohibit replacement of the licensed based on the licensed work that prohibit replacement of the licensed
components of the larger non-LGPL’d work, or prohibit decompilation or components of the larger non-LGPL'd work, or prohibit decompilation or
reverse engineering in order to enhance or fix bugs in the LGPL’d components. reverse engineering in order to enhance or fix bugs in the LGPL'd components.
LGPLv3 is not surprisingly easier to understand and examine from a compliance LGPLv3 is not surprisingly easier to understand and examine from a compliance
lens, since the FSF was influenced in LGPLv3's drafting by questions and lens, since the FSF was influenced in LGPLv3's drafting by questions and
@ -1424,8 +1424,8 @@ is most likely to fund improvements on the software.
A few stories abound in the GPL enforcement community that companies have A few stories abound in the GPL enforcement community that companies have
often formed beneficial consulting or employment relationships with often formed beneficial consulting or employment relationships with
developers they first encountered through enforcement. In some cases, developers they first encountered through enforcement. In some cases,
working together to alter the mode of use of the project’s code in the working together to alter the mode of use of the project's code in the
company’s products was an explicit element in dispute resolution. More company's products was an explicit element in dispute resolution. More
often, the communication channels opened in the course of the inquiry served often, the communication channels opened in the course of the inquiry served
other and more fruitful purposes later. other and more fruitful purposes later.

30
gpl-lgpl.tex
View file

@ -1190,7 +1190,7 @@ theoretical or speculative dispute among lawyers, because ``the work'' ---
the primary unit of consideration under most copyright rules -- is not a unit the primary unit of consideration under most copyright rules -- is not a unit
of computer programming. In order to determine whether a ``routine'' an of computer programming. In order to determine whether a ``routine'' an
``object'', a ``function'', a ``library'' or any other unit of software is ``object'', a ``function'', a ``library'' or any other unit of software is
part of one ``work'' when combined with other GPL’d code, we must ask a part of one ``work'' when combined with other GPL'd code, we must ask a
question that copyright law will not directly answer in the same technical question that copyright law will not directly answer in the same technical
terms. terms.
@ -1692,14 +1692,14 @@ of the GPL are upheld, goes far above and beyond the permissions that one
would get with a typical work not covered by a copyleft license. Thus, to would get with a typical work not covered by a copyleft license. Thus, to
say that this condition is any way unreasonable is simply ludicrous. say that this condition is any way unreasonable is simply ludicrous.
The GPL recognizes what is outside its scope. When a programmer’s work is The GPL recognizes what is outside its scope. When a programmer's work is
``separate and independent'' from any GPL’d program code with which it could be ``separate and independent'' from any GPL'd program code with which it could be
combined, then the obligations of copyleft do not extend to the work combined, then the obligations of copyleft do not extend to the work
separately distributed. Thus, Far from attempting to extend copyleft beyond the separately distributed. Thus, Far from attempting to extend copyleft beyond the
scope of copyright, the licenses explicitly recognize. scope of copyright, the licenses explicitly recognize.
Thus, GPL recognizes what is outside its scope. When a programmer's work is Thus, GPL recognizes what is outside its scope. When a programmer's work is
``separate and independent'' from any GPL’d program code with which it could ``separate and independent'' from any GPL'd program code with which it could
be combined, then copyleft obligations do not extend to the independent work be combined, then copyleft obligations do not extend to the independent work
separately distributed. Thus, far from attempting to extend copyleft beyond separately distributed. Thus, far from attempting to extend copyleft beyond
the scope of copyright, GPL explicitly limits the scope of copyleft to the the scope of copyright, GPL explicitly limits the scope of copyleft to the
@ -1707,7 +1707,7 @@ scope of copyright.
GPL does not, however (as is sometimes suggested) distinguish ``dynamic'' GPL does not, however (as is sometimes suggested) distinguish ``dynamic''
from ``static'' linking of program code. It is occasionally suggested that a from ``static'' linking of program code. It is occasionally suggested that a
subroutine ``dynamically'' linked to GPL’d code is, by virtue of the linking subroutine ``dynamically'' linked to GPL'd code is, by virtue of the linking
alone, inherently outside the scope of copyleft on the main work. This is a alone, inherently outside the scope of copyleft on the main work. This is a
misunderstanding. When two software components are joined together to make misunderstanding. When two software components are joined together to make
one work (whether a main and some library subroutines, two objects with their one work (whether a main and some library subroutines, two objects with their
@ -2271,13 +2271,13 @@ In short, GPLv2~\S6 says that your license for the software is your one and
only copyright license allowing you to copy, modify and distribute the only copyright license allowing you to copy, modify and distribute the
software. software.
GPLv2~\S6 is GPLv2’s ``automatic downstream licensing'' GPLv2~\S6 is GPLv2's ``automatic downstream licensing''
provision\footnote{This section was substantially expanded for clarity and provision\footnote{This section was substantially expanded for clarity and
detail in \hyperref[GPLv3s10]{GPLv3~\S10}.}. Each time you detail in \hyperref[GPLv3s10]{GPLv3~\S10}.}. Each time you
redistribute a GPL’d program, the recipient automatically receives a license redistribute a GPL'd program, the recipient automatically receives a license
from each original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the program subject from each original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the program subject
to the conditions of the license. The redistributor need not take any to the conditions of the license. The redistributor need not take any
to ensure the downstream recipient’s acceptance of the license terms. to ensure the downstream recipient's acceptance of the license terms.
This places every copyright holder in the chain of descent of the code This places every copyright holder in the chain of descent of the code
in legal privity, or direct relationship, with every downstream in legal privity, or direct relationship, with every downstream
redistributor. Two legal effects follow. First, downstream parties redistributor. Two legal effects follow. First, downstream parties
@ -3522,7 +3522,7 @@ requirements hat GPLv3 are as follows:
\item This provision allows limitations on the use of names of licensor for \item This provision allows limitations on the use of names of licensor for
publicity purposes. This provision also yields additional compatibility publicity purposes. This provision also yields additional compatibility
with non-copyleft Free Software licenses that prohibit the use of the with non-copyleft Free Software licenses that prohibit the use of the
licensor’s name on unmodified versions (or other prohibitions on licensor's name on unmodified versions (or other prohibitions on
advertising rights). The third clause of the advertising rights). The third clause of the
\href{http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause}{3-Clause BSD \href{http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause}{3-Clause BSD
License}, for example, long considered de-facto compatible with GPLv2 License}, for example, long considered de-facto compatible with GPLv2
@ -3698,7 +3698,7 @@ In general, GPLv3 provides for two classes of patent commitments:
\begin{itemize} \begin{itemize}
\item Grant of license to claims in contributor versions: GPLv3~\S11 \item Grant of license to claims in contributor versions: GPLv3~\S11
introduces an affirmative grant of rights to patent claims by those who introduces an affirmative grant of rights to patent claims by those who
contribute code to GPL’d programs. The intent is to prevent parties from contribute code to GPL'd programs. The intent is to prevent parties from
aggressively asserting patents against users of code those parties have aggressively asserting patents against users of code those parties have
themselves modified --- in theory preventing betrayal by ``insiders'' of themselves modified --- in theory preventing betrayal by ``insiders'' of
the copyleft community. A contributor's patent claims necessarily the copyleft community. A contributor's patent claims necessarily
@ -3891,8 +3891,8 @@ availability option, so it remains.
% FIXME-LATER: This text is likely redundant and a bit confusing. Needs work % FIXME-LATER: This text is likely redundant and a bit confusing. Needs work
% to use. % to use.
%% If A takes a patent license from B that benefits A only, rather than A’s %% If A takes a patent license from B that benefits A only, rather than A's
%% customers or their distributees, A imposes risk from B’s patents on others %% customers or their distributees, A imposes risk from B's patents on others
%% that it does not suffer itself. Under many circumstances, this is an %% that it does not suffer itself. Under many circumstances, this is an
%% acceptable outcome. If, however, A is the only possible source of the %% acceptable outcome. If, however, A is the only possible source of the
%% program, by taking such a license and distributing in reliance on it, A is in %% program, by taking such a license and distributing in reliance on it, A is in
@ -4158,7 +4158,7 @@ software is Free Software realize that full copyleft does not best
serve us. The GNU Lesser General Public License (``GNU LGPL'') was serve us. The GNU Lesser General Public License (``GNU LGPL'') was
designed as a solution for such situations. designed as a solution for such situations.
The Lesser General Public License is sometimes described as a ``weak copyleft'' The Lesser General Public License is sometimes described as a ``weak copyleft''
license, because code licensed under LGPL’s terms can be combined with code license, because code licensed under LGPL's terms can be combined with code
under non-free licenses, and is sometimes used in that fashion. under non-free licenses, and is sometimes used in that fashion.
\section{The First LGPL'd Program} \section{The First LGPL'd Program}
@ -4473,7 +4473,7 @@ those versions are themselves libraries. LGPLv2.1 code can therefore not be
compliantly taken from its context in a library and placed in a non-library compliantly taken from its context in a library and placed in a non-library
modified version or work based on the work. For its part, LGPLv2~\S6 does modified version or work based on the work. For its part, LGPLv2~\S6 does
not provide an exception for this rule: a combination may be made of a not provide an exception for this rule: a combination may be made of a
modified version of an LGPL’d library with other code, but the LGPL’d code modified version of an LGPL'd library with other code, but the LGPL'd code
must continue to be structured as a library, and to that library the terms of must continue to be structured as a library, and to that library the terms of
the license continue to apply. the license continue to apply.
@ -4759,7 +4759,7 @@ means that it:
\begin{quote} \begin{quote}
\begin{enumerate}[label=4(d)(\arabic*):,ref=LGPLv3s4d\arabic*] \begin{enumerate}[label=4(d)(\arabic*):,ref=LGPLv3s4d\arabic*]
\item uses at run time a copy of the library already present on \item uses at run time a copy of the library already present on
the user’s computer system, rather than copying library functions into the user's computer system, rather than copying library functions into
the executable, and the executable, and
\item will operate properly with a modified version of \item will operate properly with a modified version of