Affero GPL section, not doing this justice now, but this is good enough to
print for Monday's class.
This commit is contained in:
parent
3878521bbf
commit
f8a9199284
1 changed files with 76 additions and 79 deletions
155
gpl-lgpl.tex
155
gpl-lgpl.tex
|
@ -3585,93 +3585,90 @@ the final sentence of GPLv2 section 7, which the FSF consider to be unnecessary.
|
|||
|
||||
\section{GPLv3~\S13: The Great Affero Compromise}
|
||||
|
||||
The main purpose of clause 7b4 was to attain GPLv3 compatibility for the
|
||||
additional condition of version 1 of the Affero GPL, with a view to
|
||||
achieving compatibility for a future version, since version 1 was
|
||||
incompatible with GPLv3.\footnote{Version 1 of the Affero GPL contains
|
||||
its own copyleft clause, worded identically to that in GPLv2, which
|
||||
conflicts with the copyleft clause in GPLv3. The Affero GPL permits
|
||||
relicensing under versions of the GPL later than version 2, but only if
|
||||
the later version ``includes terms and conditions substantially
|
||||
equivalent to those of this license'' (Affero GPL, version 1, section
|
||||
9). The Affero license was written with the expectation that its
|
||||
The Affero GPL was written with the expectation that its
|
||||
additional requirement would be incorporated into the terms of GPLv3
|
||||
itself, rather than being placeable on parts added to a covered work
|
||||
through the mechanism of section 7 of GPLv3.} However, we wrote the
|
||||
clause broadly enough to cover a range of other possible terms that
|
||||
would differ from the Affero condition in their details. Draft 3 no
|
||||
longer pursues the more ambitious goal of allowing compatibility for a
|
||||
whole category of Affero-like terms. In place of 7b4, we have added a
|
||||
new section 13 that simply permits GPLv3-covered code to be linked with
|
||||
code covered by the forthcoming version 2 of the Affero GPL.
|
||||
itself. Many software freedom advocates, including some authors of this
|
||||
tutorial, advocated heavily for that, and fully expected it to happen.
|
||||
|
||||
We have made this decision in the face of irreconcilable views from
|
||||
different parts of our community. While we had known that many
|
||||
commercial users of free software were opposed to the inclusion of a
|
||||
mandatory Affero-like requirement in the body of GPLv3 itself, we were
|
||||
surprised at their opposition to its availability through section 7.
|
||||
Free software vendors allied to these users joined in their objections,
|
||||
as did a number of free software developers arguing on ethical as well
|
||||
as practical grounds.
|
||||
The FSF, however, chose not to include the Affero clause in GPLv3, due to
|
||||
what it called ``irreconcilable views from
|
||||
different parts of the community''. Many
|
||||
commercial users of Free Software were opposed to the inclusion of a
|
||||
mandatory Affero-like requirement in the body of GPLv3 itself. In fact, some
|
||||
wealthier companies even threatened to permanently fund forks of many FSF
|
||||
copyrighted-programs under GPLv2 if the Affero clause appeared in GPLv3.
|
||||
|
||||
Some of this hostility seemed to be based on a misapprehension that
|
||||
Affero-like terms placed on part of a covered work would somehow extend
|
||||
to the whole of the work.\footnote{It is possible that the presence of
|
||||
the GPLv2-derived copyleft clause in the existing Affero GPL contributed
|
||||
to this misunderstanding.} Our explanations to the contrary did little
|
||||
to satisfy these critics; their objections to 7b4 instead evolved into a
|
||||
broader indictment of the additional requirements scheme of section 7.
|
||||
It was clear, however, that much of the concern about 7b4 stemmed from
|
||||
its general formulation. Many were alarmed at the prospect of GPLv3
|
||||
compatibility for numerous Affero-like licensing conditions,
|
||||
unpredictable in their details but potentially having significant
|
||||
commercial consequences.
|
||||
Meanwhile, there was disagreement even among copyleft enthusiasts about the
|
||||
importance of the provision. A coalition never formed, and ultimately the
|
||||
more powerful interest implicitly allied with the companies who deeply opposed
|
||||
the Affero clause such that the FSF felt the Affero clause would need its own
|
||||
license, but one compatible with GPLv3.
|
||||
|
||||
On the other hand, many developers, otherwise sympathetic to the policy
|
||||
goals of the Affero GPL, have objected to the form of the additional
|
||||
requirement in that license. These developers were generally
|
||||
disappointed with our decision to allow Affero-like terms through
|
||||
section 7, rather than adopt a condition for GPLv3. Echoing their
|
||||
concerns about the Affero GPL itself, they found fault with the wording
|
||||
of the section 7 clause in both of the earlier drafts. We drafted 7b4
|
||||
at a higher level than its Draft 1 counterpart based in part on comments
|
||||
from these developers. They considered the Draft 1 clause too closely
|
||||
tied to the Affero mechanism of preserving functioning facilities for
|
||||
downloading source, which they found too restrictive of the right of
|
||||
modification. The 7b4 rewording did not satisfy them, however. They
|
||||
objected to its limitation to terms requiring compliance by network
|
||||
transmission of source, and to the technically imprecise or inaccurate
|
||||
use of the phrase ``same network session.''
|
||||
GPLv3~\S13 makes GPLv3 compatible with the AGPLv3, so that at least code can
|
||||
be shared between AGPLv3'd and GPLv3' projects, even if the Affero clause
|
||||
does not automatically apply to all GPLv3'd works.
|
||||
|
||||
We have concluded that any redrafting of the 7b4 clause would fail to
|
||||
satisfy the concerns of both sets of its critics. The first group
|
||||
maintains that GPLv3 should do nothing about the problem of public
|
||||
use. The second group would prefer for GPLv3 itself to have an
|
||||
Affero-like condition, but that seems to us too drastic. By permitting
|
||||
GPLv3-covered code to be linked with code covered by version 2 of the
|
||||
Affero GPL, the new section 13 honors our original commitment to
|
||||
achieving GPL compatibility for the Affero license.
|
||||
%FIXME-LATER: no time to do this justice, will come back later, instead the
|
||||
%above.
|
||||
|
||||
Version 2 of the Affero GPL is not yet published. We will work with
|
||||
Affero, Inc., and with all other interested members of our community, to
|
||||
complete the drafting of this license following the release of Draft 3,
|
||||
with a goal of having a final version available by the time of our
|
||||
adoption of the final version of GPLv3. We hope the new Affero license
|
||||
will satisfy those developers who are concerned about the issue of
|
||||
public use of unconveyed versions but who have concerns about the
|
||||
narrowness of the condition in the existing Affero license.
|
||||
%% Some of this hostility seemed to be based on a misapprehension that
|
||||
%% Affero-like terms placed on part of a covered work would somehow extend
|
||||
%% to the whole of the work.\footnote{It is possible that the presence of
|
||||
%% the GPLv2-derived copyleft clause in the existing Affero GPL contributed
|
||||
%% to this misunderstanding.} Our explanations to the contrary did little
|
||||
%% to satisfy these critics; their objections to 7b4 instead evolved into a
|
||||
%% broader indictment of the additional requirements scheme of section 7.
|
||||
%% It was clear, however, that much of the concern about 7b4 stemmed from
|
||||
%% its general formulation. Many were alarmed at the prospect of GPLv3
|
||||
%% compatibility for numerous Affero-like licensing conditions,
|
||||
%% unpredictable in their details but potentially having significant
|
||||
%% commercial consequences.
|
||||
|
||||
As the second sentence in section 13 indicates, when a combined work is
|
||||
made by linking GPLv3-covered code with Affero-covered code, the
|
||||
copyleft on one part will not extend to the other part.\footnote{The
|
||||
plan is that the additional requirement of the new Affero license will
|
||||
state a reciprocal limitation.} That is to say, in such combinations,
|
||||
the Affero requirement will apply only to the part that was brought into
|
||||
the combination under the Affero license. Those who receive such a
|
||||
combination and do not wish to use code under the Affero requirement may
|
||||
remove the Affero-covered portion of the combination.
|
||||
%% On the other hand, many developers, otherwise sympathetic to the policy
|
||||
%% goals of the Affero GPL, have objected to the form of the additional
|
||||
%% requirement in that license. These developers were generally
|
||||
%% disappointed with our decision to allow Affero-like terms through
|
||||
%% section 7, rather than adopt a condition for GPLv3. Echoing their
|
||||
%% concerns about the Affero GPL itself, they found fault with the wording
|
||||
%% of the section 7 clause in both of the earlier drafts. We drafted 7b4
|
||||
%% at a higher level than its Draft 1 counterpart based in part on comments
|
||||
%% from these developers. They considered the Draft 1 clause too closely
|
||||
%% tied to the Affero mechanism of preserving functioning facilities for
|
||||
%% downloading source, which they found too restrictive of the right of
|
||||
%% modification. The 7b4 rewording did not satisfy them, however. They
|
||||
%% objected to its limitation to terms requiring compliance by network
|
||||
%% transmission of source, and to the technically imprecise or inaccurate
|
||||
%% use of the phrase ``same network session.''
|
||||
|
||||
Those who criticize the permission to link with code under the Affero
|
||||
%% We have concluded that any redrafting of the 7b4 clause would fail to
|
||||
%% satisfy the concerns of both sets of its critics. The first group
|
||||
%% maintains that GPLv3 should do nothing about the problem of public
|
||||
%% use. The second group would prefer for GPLv3 itself to have an
|
||||
%% Affero-like condition, but that seems to us too drastic. By permitting
|
||||
%% GPLv3-covered code to be linked with code covered by version 2 of the
|
||||
%% Affero GPL, the new section 13 honors our original commitment to
|
||||
%% achieving GPL compatibility for the Affero license.
|
||||
|
||||
%% Version 2 of the Affero GPL is not yet published. We will work with
|
||||
%% Affero, Inc., and with all other interested members of our community, to
|
||||
%% complete the drafting of this license following the release of Draft 3,
|
||||
%% with a goal of having a final version available by the time of our
|
||||
%% adoption of the final version of GPLv3. We hope the new Affero license
|
||||
%% will satisfy those developers who are concerned about the issue of
|
||||
%% public use of unconveyed versions but who have concerns about the
|
||||
%% narrowness of the condition in the existing Affero license.
|
||||
|
||||
%% As the second sentence in section 13 indicates, when a combined work is
|
||||
%% made by linking GPLv3-covered code with Affero-covered code, the
|
||||
%% copyleft on one part will not extend to the other part.\footnote{The
|
||||
%% plan is that the additional requirement of the new Affero license will
|
||||
%% state a reciprocal limitation.} That is to say, in such combinations,
|
||||
%% the Affero requirement will apply only to the part that was brought into
|
||||
%% the combination under the Affero license. Those who receive such a
|
||||
%% combination and do not wish to use code under the Affero requirement may
|
||||
%% remove the Affero-covered portion of the combination.
|
||||
|
||||
Meanwhile, those who criticize the permission to link with code under the Affero
|
||||
GPL should recognize that most other free software licenses also permit
|
||||
such linking.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue