Shorten length; include only section discussion
Shorten this down to include discussion only of specific GPL sections.
This commit is contained in:
parent
9122138cf0
commit
a53d1919b0
1 changed files with 3 additions and 178 deletions
|
@ -1,141 +1,8 @@
|
|||
% Brief Introduction to the GNU General Public License
|
||||
% Considering Key Sections of the GPL
|
||||
% Bradley M. Kuhn
|
||||
% Monday 24 March 2014
|
||||
% Tuesday 9 May 2017
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
# Audience Polls
|
||||
|
||||
+ My goal here is to move faster or slower based on audience knowledge.
|
||||
|
||||
+ There are folks in this audience who have worked with this stuff for years,
|
||||
and those who are completely new.
|
||||
|
||||
+ We want these presentations to be valuable to all of you.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Please, don't be embarrassed:
|
||||
+ Ever GPL expert in the world, including me, started as a student who
|
||||
knew none of this.
|
||||
|
||||
# IANAL
|
||||
|
||||
<cite>IANAL</cite>
|
||||
|
||||
# My Affiliations
|
||||
|
||||
+ Formerly had John's job, Executive Director of FSF, years ago.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Currently: on Board of Directors of FSF.
|
||||
|
||||
+ President of Software Freedom Conservancy.
|
||||
|
||||
# How These Orgs Relate to GPL?
|
||||
|
||||
+ FSF
|
||||
+ Invented copyleft.
|
||||
+ Authors & stewards of the GPL.
|
||||
+ Holder of copyrights on many key GNU programs …
|
||||
+ … and therefore enforcers of those copyrights.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Software Freedom Conservancy
|
||||
+ Adviser on legal issues of copyright, etc. to Free Software projects.
|
||||
+ Holder of some copyrights on its member projects.
|
||||
+ Enforcer of GPL on behalf of many copyright holders in:
|
||||
+ BusyBox, Samba, Mercurial, and the kernel named Linux.
|
||||
|
||||
# How this Hour Will Go?
|
||||
|
||||
+ Materials presented will mix the simple & complex.
|
||||
|
||||
+ We cannot possibly cover the entire GPL in one hour.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Discuss: motivations, origins, then a few of GPL's sections.
|
||||
|
||||
+ I understand the mix of backgrounds in the audience.
|
||||
|
||||
# A Restaurant's Lawyer?
|
||||
|
||||
+ Considering why you want to learn this.
|
||||
|
||||
+ What if your client was a restaurant?
|
||||
|
||||
+ What would you want to need to know?
|
||||
|
||||
# Restaurant Lawyer: What'd You Study?
|
||||
|
||||
+ If you were a restaurant's lawyer:
|
||||
|
||||
+ Probably three areas of law you'd focus on:
|
||||
+ building codes.
|
||||
+ health and safety regulations.
|
||||
+ tax regulations.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Who would want to hear from?
|
||||
|
||||
# Restaurant Lawyer: What'd You Study?
|
||||
|
||||
+ Figure out the motivations behind the building code:
|
||||
+ What parts are arcane and less important to inspectors?
|
||||
+ How do inspections work?
|
||||
+ What are the penalties?
|
||||
|
||||
+ Figure out the same for health & safety:
|
||||
+ Who inspects, and when?
|
||||
+ What's the health code say, and what checklist do inspectors use?
|
||||
|
||||
+ Likely Questions:
|
||||
+ Who's in charge of all this?
|
||||
+ What's purpose and intent of these regulations?
|
||||
+ Can I meet the inspectors?
|
||||
|
||||
# Why Listen To Us?
|
||||
|
||||
+ FSF: Understanding the purpose and intent of the GPL.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Conservancy & FSF:
|
||||
+ both enforce the GPL.
|
||||
+ if your client violates, you will hear from one of us.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Such access to drafters, interpreters, enforcers is highly unique.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Someday, we may (or already have) sit across the table from you.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Our transparency does make your job easier.
|
||||
|
||||
# The Mindset of GPL
|
||||
|
||||
+ GPL protects software freedom.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Ultimate goal: make sure every user has the four freedoms.
|
||||
+ Freedom to run the software.
|
||||
+ Freedom to study and modify the software.
|
||||
+ Freedom to share the software.
|
||||
+ Freedom to distribute modified versions.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Every clause in GPL was designed to uphold one of these freedoms.
|
||||
+ Or, it's a compromise of drafting in adoption vs. freedom debate.
|
||||
|
||||
# Using Copyright
|
||||
|
||||
+ GPL is primarily a copyright license.
|
||||
+ Software is copyrighted.
|
||||
+ License grants key freedoms.
|
||||
+ Requirement prohibit activities that take away freedoms.
|
||||
|
||||
+ General concept: copyleft.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Specific implementation: GPL.
|
||||
|
||||
<hr/>
|
||||
|
||||
<span class="fitonslide">
|
||||
|
||||
> Copyright protection subsists … original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression … from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.
|
||||
|
||||
<p align=right>
|
||||
— <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/102">17 USC §102</a>
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
|
||||
# Conditional Permissions
|
||||
|
||||
+ A copyleft license grants copyright permissions, conditionally.
|
||||
|
@ -148,41 +15,11 @@
|
|||
|
||||
+ 9 times in GPLv3.
|
||||
|
||||
# Compare To Proprietary Licenses
|
||||
|
||||
+ Yes, the GPL has its requirements.
|
||||
|
||||
+ But *none* of these activities are ever permitted under proprietary
|
||||
licenses.
|
||||
|
||||
+ If you don't like what the GPL requires you to do, then just tell your
|
||||
client to use the proprietary software instead.
|
||||
|
||||
+ That way, they know the answer to every question is “no”
|
||||
|
||||
+ rather than: “yes, but only as long as you …”
|
||||
|
||||
# The Technical Gap
|
||||
|
||||
+ Understanding GPL well requires a some software expertise & legal
|
||||
expertise.
|
||||
|
||||
+ You don't have to be a professional on either side to grok it.
|
||||
+ but you're best off if you're a professional in one & an amateur
|
||||
in the other.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Most important technical concepts you need:
|
||||
+ source code, binaries, methods of distribution.
|
||||
|
||||
# Considering Sections of the GPL
|
||||
|
||||
+ With the remaining time …
|
||||
+ in interest of the experts in the audience …
|
||||
+ let's dig into a few specific sections.
|
||||
|
||||
+ GPL ♥ 17 USC§106(2) & 17 USC§106(3)
|
||||
|
||||
+ Modification and distribution.
|
||||
+ GPL hinges on modification and distribution.
|
||||
|
||||
# Why Permission to Modify?
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -404,15 +241,3 @@ The Corresponding Source for a work in source code form is that
|
|||
same work.
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
# The GPL is a Complex Topic
|
||||
|
||||
+ An in-depth seminar on GPL's provisions is a one-day course …
|
||||
+ … but the written materials discuss every section in depth.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Keep in mind: every requirement has a carefully considered purpose to
|
||||
uphold freedom of users.
|
||||
|
||||
+ Software freedom licenses have a moral perspective.
|
||||
+ This is probably the most difficult thing for lawyers to understand.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue