GPL Installation Instructions Article: abstract
This is my first draft at an abstract for this article. I suspect that this Abstract is too long, so I may move some it out into other text.
This commit is contained in:
parent
4a26646df6
commit
ad0696d186
1 changed files with 59 additions and 0 deletions
59
gpl-installation.tex
Normal file
59
gpl-installation.tex
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
|
|||
\documentstyle[twocolumn]{article}
|
||||
\pagestyle{empty}
|
||||
\begin{document}
|
||||
|
||||
%don't want date printed
|
||||
\date{}
|
||||
|
||||
%make title bold and 14 pt font (Latex default is non-bold, 16 pt)
|
||||
|
||||
\title{\Large\bf A Comprehensive Consideration of Installation Requirements of the GPL}
|
||||
|
||||
%for two authors (this is what is printed)
|
||||
|
||||
\author{\begin{tabular}[t]{c@{\extracolsep{8em}}c@{\extracolsep{8em}}c}
|
||||
Bradley M. Kuhn & Behan Webster \\
|
||||
Software Freedom Conservancy, Inc. & Converse In Code
|
||||
\end{tabular}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
\thispagestyle{empty}
|
||||
|
||||
\maketitle
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection*{\centering Abstract}
|
||||
|
||||
The GNU General License (``GPL'') is the most widely used \textit{copyleft}
|
||||
license for software. Copyleft licenses function as copyright license in
|
||||
atypical manner: rather than restricting permission to copy, modify and
|
||||
redistribute the software, copyleft licenses encourage and enable such
|
||||
activities. However, these license have strict requirements that mandate
|
||||
further software sharing by enabling downstream users to easily improve,
|
||||
modify, and upgrade the copylefted software on their own.
|
||||
|
||||
GPL has two versions in common use: version 2 (``GPLv2'') and version 3
|
||||
(``GPLv3''). Both versions require those who redistribute the software to
|
||||
provide information related to the installation of software modified by
|
||||
downstream. These installation requirements, however, differ somewhat in
|
||||
their details. While some business practices around license compliance
|
||||
efforts have reached adequate sophistication to address simpler compliance
|
||||
problems, firms have generally given inadequate attention to the installation
|
||||
requirements of both common versions of GPL\@. Misunderstanding of these
|
||||
clauses is often common, and violations related to installation instructions
|
||||
remain prevalent.
|
||||
|
||||
Furthermore, perceived differences in the requirements, and lack of rigorous
|
||||
study of the Installation Information requirements of GPLv3\S6 has allowed
|
||||
rumor and impression, rather than a textually grounded adherence to the
|
||||
written rules, to govern industry response in adoption of software licensed
|
||||
under GPLv3. The resulting scenario often causes redistributors to assume
|
||||
the GPLv2 has \textbf{no} requirements regarding installation information,
|
||||
and that GPLv3's requirements in this regard are impossible to meet,
|
||||
particularly in security-conscious embedded products.
|
||||
|
||||
This paper explores the installation provisions of both common versions of
|
||||
GPL, discusses historical motivations and context for each, and suggests best
|
||||
practices regarding installation information for firms that redistribute
|
||||
software under both licenses.
|
||||
|
||||
\end{document}
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue