Changeset - c556c37c103a
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Bradley M. Kuhn - 21 years ago 2003-05-29 23:44:11
bkuhn@fsf.org
* As submitted to OSCON 2003
1 file changed with 21 insertions and 20 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
GPL-Business/gpl-business.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ designed to defend and uphold these principles.
 

	
 
The Free Software Definition is set forth in full on FSF's website at
 
\href{http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-sw.html}{http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-sw.html}.
 
This section presents an abbreviated version that will focus on the parts
 
that are most pertinent to the terms of the GPL\@.
 
\verb0http://www.fsf.org/0 \verb0philosophy/free-sw.html0.  This section
 
presents an abbreviated version that will focus on the parts that are most
 
pertinent to the terms of the GPL\@.
 

	
 
A particular program is Free Software if it grants a particular user of
...
 
@@ -166,6 +166,5 @@ it Free Software\footnote{The political differences between the Free
 
Software Movement and the Open Source Movement are documented on FSF's
 
website at
 
\href{http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html}
 
{http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html}.},
 
{\tt http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html}},
 
those who call the software ``Open Source'' are focused on a side issue.
 
User access to the source code of a program is a prerequisite to make use
...
 
@@ -237,5 +236,5 @@ to commission software modification.
 

	
 
Users may share Free Software in a variety of ways.  Free Software
 
advocates work to eliminate fundamental ethical dilemma of the software
 
advocates work to eliminate a fundamental ethical dilemma of the software
 
age: choosing between obeying a software license, and friendship (by
 
giving away a copy of a program your friend who likes the software you are
...
 
@@ -318,5 +317,5 @@ law\footnote{This statement is a bit of an oversimplification.  Patents
 
  without reliance on any legal system.  However, the primary control
 
  mechanism for software is copyright.}.  Copyright law, with respect to
 
software governs copying, modifying, and redistributing that
 
software, governs copying, modifying, and redistributing that
 
software\footnote{Copyright law in general also governs ``public
 
  performance'' of copyrighted works.  There is no generally agreed
...
 
@@ -369,5 +368,5 @@ Software.
 
Carefully note that software in the public domain is \emph{not} licensed
 
in any way.  It is nonsensical to say software is ``licensed for the
 
public domain'', or any phrase that implies the copyright holder gave an
 
public domain'', or any phrase that implies the copyright holder gave
 
expressed permission to take actions governed by copyright law.
 

	
...
 
@@ -410,5 +409,5 @@ its work today.  Specifically because of this ``embrace, proprietarize and
 
extend'' cycle, FSF made a conscious choice to copyright its Free Software,
 
and then license it under ``copyleft'' terms, and many, including the
 
developers of the kernel named Linux have chosen to follow this paradigm.
 
developers of the kernel named Linux, have chosen to follow this paradigm.
 

	
 
Copyleft is a legal strategy to defend, uphold and propagate software
...
 
@@ -471,8 +470,8 @@ soon for-profit companies discovered that the software could work for them
 
as well, and their system administrators began to use it in place of
 
Microsoft Windows NT file-servers.  This served to lower the cost of
 
ownership by orders of magnitude.  There was suddenly room in Windows
 
file-server budgets to hire contractors to improve Samba.  Some of the first
 
people hired to do such work were those same two graduate students who
 
originally developed the software.
 
running such servers by orders of magnitude.  There was suddenly room in
 
Windows file-server budgets to hire contractors to improve Samba.  Some of
 
the first people hired to do such work were those same two graduate
 
students who originally developed the software.
 

	
 
The non-commercial users, however, were not concerned when these two
...
 
@@ -592,4 +591,5 @@ how software freedom is respected.
 

	
 
\section{GPL \S 0: Freedom to Run}
 
\label{GPLs0}
 

	
 
\S 0, the opening section of GPL, sets forth that the work is governed by
...
 
@@ -622,5 +622,5 @@ contrast, unregulated uses are those that are not covered by the statue
 
nor determined by a court to be covered, but are common and enjoyed by
 
many users.  An example of unregulated use is reading a printout of the
 
programs source code like an instruction book for the purpose of learning
 
program's source code like an instruction book for the purpose of learning
 
how to be a better programmer.
 

	
...
 
@@ -645,5 +645,5 @@ because it clears up a common misconception about the GPL\@.
 
The GPL is often mistakenly criticized because it fails to give a
 
definition of ``derivative work''.  In fact, it would be incorrect and
 
problematic if the GPL attempt to define this.  A copyright license, in
 
problematic if the GPL attempted to define this.  A copyright license, in
 
fact, has no control over what may or may not be a derivative work.  This
 
matter is left up to copyright law, not the licenses that utilize it.
...
 
@@ -656,4 +656,5 @@ opinions must give us guidance to decide the border cases.
 

	
 
\section{GPL \S 1: Verbatim Copying}
 
\label{GPLs1}
 

	
 
GPL \S 1 covers the matter of redistributing the source code of a program
...
 
@@ -706,5 +707,5 @@ continues and develops, remains Free as in freedom.
 

	
 
To achieve that goal, \S 2 first sets forth that the rights of
 
redistribution modified versions are the same as those for verbatim
 
redistribution of modified versions are the same as those for verbatim
 
copying, as presented in \S 1.  Therefore, the details of charging,
 
keeping copyright notices intact, and other \S 1 provisions are in tact
...
 
@@ -719,8 +720,8 @@ took to them.  For some users, it is important to know that they are using
 
the standard version of program, because while there are many advantages
 
to using a fork, there are a few disadvantages.  Users should be informed
 
the historical context of the software version they use, so that they can
 
make proper support choices.  Finally, \S 2(a) serves an academic purpose
 
--- ensuring that future developers can use a diachronic approach to
 
understand the software.
 
about the historical context of the software version they use, so that
 
they can make proper support choices.  Finally, \S 2(a) serves an academic
 
purpose --- ensuring that future developers can use a diachronic approach
 
to understand the software.
 

	
 
\medskip
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)