Changeset - e0352ae6985b
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Bradley Kuhn (bkuhn) - 10 years ago 2014-03-21 02:12:06
bkuhn@ebb.org
More comments out for printing tomorrow.
1 file changed with 5 insertions and 3 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
enforcement-case-studies.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -25,101 +25,103 @@ This part is: \\
 
\begin{tabbing}
 
Copyright \= \copyright{} 2003, 2004 \= \hspace{.2in} Free Software Foundation, Inc. \\
 
\end{tabbing}
 

	
 
\vspace{1in}
 

	
 
\begin{center}
 
Authors of this part are: \\
 

	
 
Bradley M. Kuhn \\
 
John Sullivan
 
\vspace{3in}
 

	
 
The copyright holders hereby grant the freedom to copy, modify, convey,
 
Adapt, and/or redistribute this work under the terms of the Creative Commons
 
Attribution Share Alike 4.0 International License.  A copy of that license is
 
available at \verb=https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode=.
 
\end{center}
 
}
 
% =====================================================================
 
% START OF SECOND DAY SEMINAR SECTION
 
% =====================================================================
 

	
 
\chapter*{Preface}
 

	
 
This one-day course presents the details of five different GPL
 
compliance cases handled by FSF's GPL Compliance Laboratory. Each case
 
offers unique insights into problems that can arise when the terms of
 
the GPL are not properly followed, and how diplomatic negotiation between
 
the violator and the copyright holder can yield positive results for
 
both parties.
 

	
 
Attendees should have successfully completely the course, a ``Detailed
 
Study and Analysis of the GPL and LGPL,'' as the material from that
 
course forms the building blocks for this material.
 

	
 
This course is of most interest to lawyers who have clients or
 
employers that deal with Free Software on a regular basis. However,
 
technical managers and executives whose businesses use or distribute
 
Free Software will also find the course very helpful.
 

	
 
\bigskip
 

	
 
These course materials are merely a summary of the highlights of the
 
course presented. Please be aware that during the actual GPL course, class
 
discussion supplements this printed curriculum. Simply reading it is
 
not equivalent to attending the course.
 

	
 
\chapter{Not All GPL Enforcement is Created Equal}
 
%FIXME-LATER: write these
 

	
 
\section{For-Profit Enforcement}
 
%\chapter{Not All GPL Enforcement is Created Equal}
 

	
 
\section{Community and Non-Profit Enforcement}
 
%\section{For-Profit Enforcement}
 

	
 
%\section{Community and Non-Profit Enforcement}
 

	
 
\chapter{Overview of Community Enforcement}
 

	
 
The GPL is a Free Software license with legal teeth. Unlike licenses like
 
the X11-style or various BSD licenses, the GPL (and by extension, the LGPL) is
 
designed to defend as well as grant freedom. We saw in the last course
 
that the GPL uses copyright law as a mechanism to grant all the key freedoms
 
essential in Free Software, but also to ensure that those freedoms
 
propagate throughout the distribution chain of the software.
 

	
 
\section{Termination Begins Enforcement}
 

	
 
As we have learned, the assurance that Free Software under the GPL remains
 
Free Software is accomplished through various terms of the GPL: \S 3 ensures
 
that binaries are always accompanied with source; \S 2 ensures that the
 
sources are adequate, complete and usable; \S 6 and \S 7 ensure that the
 
license of the software is always the GPL for everyone, and that no other
 
legal agreements or licenses trump the GPL. It is \S 4, however, that ensures
 
that the GPL can be enforced.
 

	
 
Thus, \S 4 is where we begin our discussion of GPL enforcement. This
 
clause is where the legal teeth of the license are rooted. As a copyright
 
license, the GPL governs only the activities governed by copyright law ---
 
copying, modifying and redistributing computer software. Unlike most
 
copyright licenses, the GPL gives wide grants of permission for engaging with
 
these activities. Such permissions continue, and all parties may exercise
 
them until such time as one party violates the terms of the GPL\@. At the
 
moment of such a violation (i.e., the engaging of copying, modifying or
 
redistributing in ways not permitted by the GPL) \S 4 is invoked. While other
 
parties may continue to operate under the GPL, the violating party loses their
 
rights.
 

	
 
Specifically, \S 4 terminates the violators' rights to continue
 
engaging in the permissions that are otherwise granted by the GPL\@.
 
Effectively, their rights revert to the copyright defaults ---
 
no permission is granted to copy, modify, nor redistribute the work.
 
Meanwhile, \S 5 points out that if the violator has no rights under
 
the GPL, they are prohibited by copyright law from engaging in the
 
activities of copying, modifying and distributing. They have lost
 
these rights because they have violated the GPL, and no other license
 
gives them permission to engage in these activities governed by copyright law.
 

	
 
\section{Ongoing Violations}
 

	
 
In conjunction with \S 4's termination of violators' rights, there is
 
one final industry fact added to the mix: rarely, does one engage in a
 
single, solitary act of copying, distributing or modifying software.
 
Almost always, a violator will have legitimately acquired a copy of a
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)