Changeset - 6faa16d45750
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Bradley Kuhn (bkuhn) - 10 years ago 2014-03-20 13:34:29
bkuhn@ebb.org
Use \S here.
1 file changed with 1 insertions and 1 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
gpl-lgpl.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -497,49 +497,49 @@ restrict users' rights to copy, share, modify and/or redistribute software.
 
However, proprietary software licenses typically use every mechanism
 
available to subjugate users.  For example:
 

	
 
\begin{itemize}
 

	
 
\item Unfortunately, despite much effort by many in the software freedom
 
  community to end patents that read on software (i.e., patents on
 
  computational ideas), they still ultimately exist.  As such, a software
 
  program might otherwise be seemly unrestricted, but a patent might read on
 
  the software and ruin everything for its users.\footnote{See
 
  \S\S~\ref{gpl-implied-patent-grant},~\ref{GPLv2s7},~\ref{GPLv3s11} for more
 
  discussion on how the patent system interacts with copyleft, and read
 
  Richard M.~Stallman's essay,
 
  \href{http://www.wired.com/opinion/2012/11/richard-stallman-software-patents/}{\textit{Let’s
 
      Limit the Effect of Software Patents, Since We Can’t Eliminate Them}}
 
  for more information on the problems these patents present to society.}
 

	
 
\item Digital Restrictions Management (usually called \defn{DRM}) is often
 
  used to impose technological restrictions on users' ability to exercise
 
  software freedom that they might otherwise be granted\footnote{See
 
    \S~\ref{GPLv3-drm} for more information on how GPL deals with this issue.}.
 
  The simplest (and perhaps oldest) form of DRM, of course, is separating
 
  software source code (read by humans), from their compiled binaries (read
 
  only by computers).  Furthermore,
 
  \href{http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201}{17 USC 1201} often
 
  \href{http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201}{17 USC~\S1201} often
 
  prohibits users legally from circumventing some of these DRM systems.
 

	
 
\item Most EULAs also include a contractual agreement that bind users further
 
  by forcing them to agree to a contractual, prohibitive software license
 
  before ever even using the software.
 

	
 
\end{itemize}
 

	
 
Thus, most proprietary software restricts users via multiple interlocking
 
legal and technological means.  Any license that truly respect the software
 
freedom of all users must not only grant appropriate copyright permissions,
 
but also \textit{prevent} restrictions from other legal and technological
 
means like those listed above.
 

	
 
\subsection{Non-USA Copyright Regimes}
 
\label{non-usa-copyright}
 

	
 
Generally speaking, copyright law operates similarly enough in countries that
 
have signed the Berne Convention on Copyright, and software freedom licenses
 
have generally taken advantage of this international standardization of
 
copyright law.  However, copyright law does differ from country to country,
 
and commonly, software freedom licenses like GPL must be considered under the
 
copyright law in the jurisdiction where any licensing dispute occurs.
 

	
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)