gpl version 3 fairness or freedom n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
GPL Version 3 Fairness or Freedom? PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
GPL Version 3 Fairness or Freedom?

GPL Version 3 Fairness or Freedom?

143 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

GPL Version 3 Fairness or Freedom?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. GPL Version 3Fairness or Freedom? Andrew Katz

  2. Background • GPL Version 2 – 1991 • Still the current version • Venerable drafting • Remember GPL V3 is still a draft

  3. Core Philosophy behind GPL If you take GPL code, modify or combine it and distribute it, you are under an obligation to make the modified source code available to third parties Freedom 0: Freedom to run Freedom 1: Freedom to study and adapt Freedom 2: Freedom to redistribute Freedom 3: Freedom to improve and release the improvements to the public

  4. GPL – the Top 3 Consequences • If you use GPL software unmodified, you don’t need to publish it; • There is nothing preventing you from running GPL software on a proprietary operating system (or vice versa) • If you modify or combine GPL software (or your developer does) and you use it only for your own internal purposes, you don’t need to publish it;

  5. Why? • Fairness It’s not fair that someone can take my work freely given, and then incorporate it into their own proprietary code….or… You have a choice: you can use my code on my terms, or you can go elsewhere

  6. Philosophical Interlude • “Freedom”. The guiding aim of the Free Software Foundation • “Fairness” – Torvald’s take • But are people more swayed by freedom or fairness? • Revolutions are allegedly about freedom…but in reality people care more about fairness.

  7. Licence Versioning Clause • Either no version is mentioned, in which case a licensee can refer to ANY version; Or • A licence specifies version X or later. • Note: Linux currently says v2 only • GPL (v2 or 3) doesn’t actually say it’s an option to force it to stick to one version. But everyone assumes this would work.

  8. Problems with GPL2 • Nascent internet • “TIVO”isation • DRM • Patents • Uncertainty of “combination” and “derivative work” • International issues

  9. How GPL3 Seeks to Address these • Emphasis on delivery by file server (and bit torrent) • Provision requiring that GPL software must be provided with private keys to enable it to be run on closed hardware • Must be able to sign work so it functions on the target device • Hideously complex. For discussion later • Change in wording to “convey” from “distribute” • Some additions, such as “right to use clause”

  10. Will GPL2 Replace GPL3? • Many GPL projects are FSF led • Linux is the biggest non-FSF GPL project • What are the issues we are trying to address? • How is GPL3 better • For end users • For licensors • For projects

  11. GPL 3 for end users, licensors and businesses • No significant difference, other than they will be able to use TiVOised code. No right to obtain the source of ANY GPL software • Businesses: patent clause may cause problems. Licence is too broad. Covers too many applications • Projects. GPL2 is easier to reform forks.

  12. The roadmap • Current discussion draft produced in July • Third discussion draft to be produced in November. • Final version out January 2007

  13. Drilling down into the clauses • Overview of significant differences

  14. Three most critical mistakes • Ask: Do you have a GPL business model? • If not, be careful with combining and creating derivative works of code • Be careful about “distribution”, even if you have an asp business model.

  15. GPL Version 3Fairness or Freedom? Andrew Katz