2003-05-28  Bradley M. Kuhn  <bkuhn@fsf.org>

	* gpl-business.tex (section{An Ecosystem of Equality}): Started

	section.

	(subsection{The Non-Commercial Ecosystem}): Wrote subsection.

	(subsection{The Commercial Ecosystem}): Wrote subsection.

	(subsection{Law Analogy}): Wrote subsection.

2003-05-27  Bradley M. Kuhn  <bkuhn@fsf.org>

	* gpl-business.tex (section{How Does Software Become Free?}):

	Finished section.

	(subsection{Public Domain Software}): Wrote section.

2003-05-26  Bradley M. Kuhn  <bkuhn@fsf.org>

	* gpl-business.tex (subsection{The Freedom to Copy and Share}):

	Wrote subsection.

	(subsection{The Freedom to Share Improvements}): Wrote subsection.

	(section{How Does Software Become Free?}): Started section.

2003-05-25  Bradley M. Kuhn  <bkuhn@fsf.org>

	* gpl-business.tex (subsection{The Freedom to Change and Modify}):

	Wrote subsection.

2003-05-24  Bradley M. Kuhn  <bkuhn@fsf.org>

	* gpl-business.tex (section{The Free Software Definition}):

	Started section.

	(subsection{The Freedom to Run}): Wrote subsection.

2003-05-23  Bradley M. Kuhn  <bkuhn@fsf.org>

	* gpl-business.tex (chapter{The GNU General Public License}):

	Formatted GPL for LaTeX.

	Added abstract from website into document.

	(chapter{What Is Free Software?}): Began chapter.

has chosen to waive those controls.  Software in the public domain is

absent copyright and absent a license.  The software freedoms discussed in

Section~\ref{Free Software Definition} are all granted because there is no

legal system in play to take them away.

\subsection{Why Copyright Free Software?}

If simply disclaiming copyright on software yields Free Software, then it

stands to reason that putting software into the public domain is the

easiest and most straightforward way to produce Free Software.  Indeed,

some major Free Software projects have chosen this method for making their

software Free.  However, most of the Free Software in existence \emph{is}

copyrighted.  In most cases (particularly in that of FSF and the GNU

Project), this was done due to very careful planning.

Software released into the public domain does grant freedom to those users

who receive the canonical versions on which the original author disclaimed

copyright.  However, since the work is not copyrighted, any non-trivial

modification made to the work is fully copyrightable.

Free Software released into the public domain initially is Free, and

perhaps some who modify the software choose to place their work into the

public domain as well.  However, over time, some entities will choose to

proprietarize their modified versions.  The public domain body of software

feeds the proprietary software.  The public commons disappears, because

fewer and fewer entities have an incentive to contribute back to the

commons, since they know that any of their competitors can proprietarize

their enhancements.  Over time, almost no interesting work is left in the

public domain, because nearly all new work is done by proprietarization.

A legal mechanism is needed to redress this problem.  FSF was in fact

originally created primarily as a legal entity to defend software freedom,

and that work of of defending software freedom is a substantial part of

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 has chosen to follow this paradigm.

Copyleft is a legal strategy to defend, uphold and propagate software

freedom.  The basic technique of copyleft is as follows: copyright the

software, license it under terms that give all the software freedoms, but

use the copyright law controls to ensure that all who receive a copy of

the software have equal rights and freedom.  In essence, copyleft grants

freedom, but forbids others to forbid that freedom from anyone else along

the distribution and modification chains.

Copyleft is a general concept.  Much like ideas for what a computer might

do must be \emph{implemented} by a program that actually does the job, so

too must copyleft be implemented in some concrete legal structure.

``Share and share alike'' is a phrase that is often enough to explain the

concept behind copyleft, but to actually make it work in the real world, a

true implementation in legal text must exist.  The GPL is the primary

implementation of copyleft in copyright licensing language.

\section{An Ecosystem of Equality}

The GPL uses copyright law to defend freedom and equally ensure users'

rights.  This ultimately creates an ecosystem of equality for both

business and non-commercial users.

\subsection{The Non-Commercial Ecosystem}

A GPL'ed code base becomes a center of a vibrant development and user

community.  Traditionally, volunteers, operating non-commercially out of

keen interest or ``scratch an itch'' motivations, produce initial versions

of a GPL'ed system.  Because of the efficient distribution channels of the

Internet, any useful GPL'ed system is adopted quickly by non-commercial

users.

Fundamentally, the early release and quick distribution of the software

gives birth to a thriving non-commercial community.  Users and developers

begin sharing bug reports and bug fixes across a shared intellectual

commons.  Users can trust the developers, because they know that if the

developers fail to address their needs or abandon the project, the GPL

ensures that someone else has the right to pick up development.

Developers know that the users cannot redistribute their software without

passing along the rights granted by GPL, so they are assured that every

one of their users is treated equally.

Because of the symmetry and fairness inherent in GPL'ed distribution,

nearly every GPL'ed package in existence has a vibrant non-commercial user

and developer base.

\subsection{The Commercial Ecosystem}

By the same token, nearly all established GPL'ed software systems have a

vibrant commercial community.  Nearly every GPL'ed system that has gained

wide adoption from non-commercial users and developers eventually begins

to fuel a commercial system around that software.

For example, consider the Samba file server system that allows Unix-like

systems (including GNU/Linux) to serve files to Microsoft Windows systems.

Two graduate students originally developed Samba in their spare time and

it was deployed non-commercially in academic environments.  However, very

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.

The non-commercial users, however, were not concerned when these two

fellows began collecting paychecks off of their GPL'ed work.  They knew

that because of the nature of the GPL that improvements that were

distributed in the commercial environment could easily be folded back into

the canonical version.  Companies are not permitted to proprietarize

Samba, so the non-commercial users, and even other commercial users are

safe in the knowledge that the software freedom ensured by GPL will remain

protected.

Commercial developers also work in concert with non-commercial developers.

Those two now-long-since graduated students continue to contribute to

Samba altruistically, but also get work doing it.  Priorities change when a

client is in the mix, but all the code is contributed back to the

canonical version.  Meanwhile, many other individuals have gotten involved

non-commercially as developers, because they want to ``cut their teeth on

Free Software'' or because the problem interest them.  When they get good

at it, perhaps they will move on to another project or perhaps they will

become commercial developers of the software themselves.

No party is a threat to another in the GPL software scenario because

everyone is on equal ground.  The GPL protects rights of the commercial

and non-commercial contributors and users equally.  The GPL creates trust,

because it is a level playing field for all.

\subsection{Law Analogy}

In his introduction to Stallman's \emph{Free Software, Free Society},

Lawrence Lessig draws an interesting analogy between the law and Free

Software.  He argues that the laws of a Free society must be protected

much like the GPL protects software.  So that I might do true justice to

Lessig's argument, I quote it verbatim:

\begin{quotation}

A ``free society'' is regulated by law. But there are limits that any free

society places on this regulation through law: No society that kept its

laws secret could ever be called free. No government that hid its

regulations from the regulated could ever stand in our tradition. Law

controls.  But it does so justly only when visibly. And law is visible

only when its terms are knowable and controllable by those it regulates,

or by the agents of those it regulates (lawyers, legislatures).

This condition on law extends beyond the work of a legislature.  Think

about the practice of law in American courts.  Lawyers are hired by their

clients to advance their clients' interests. Sometimes that interest is

advanced through litigation. In the course of this litigation, lawyers

write briefs.  These briefs in turn affect opinions written by judges.

These opinions decide who wins a particular case, or whether a certain law

can stand consistently with a constitution.

All the material in this process is free in the sense that Stallman means.

Legal briefs are open and free for others to use.  The arguments are

transparent (which is different from saying they are good) and the

reasoning can be taken without the permission of the original lawyers.

The opinions they produce can be quoted in later briefs.  They can be

copied and integrated into another brief or opinion.  The ``source code''

for American law is by design, and by principle, open and free for anyone

to take. And take lawyers do---for it is a measure of a great brief that

it achieves its creativity through the reuse of what happened before.  The

source is free; creativity and an economy is built upon it.

This economy of free code (and here I mean free legal code) doesn't starve

lawyers.  Law firms have enough incentive to produce great briefs even

though the stuff they build can be taken and copied by anyone else.  The

lawyer is a craftsman; his or her product is public.  Yet the crafting is

not charity.  Lawyers get paid; the public doesn't demand such work

without price.  Instead this economy flourishes, with later work added to

the earlier.

We could imagine a legal practice that was different---briefs and

arguments that were kept secret; rulings that announced a result but not

the reasoning.  Laws that were kept by the police but published to no one

else.  Regulation that operated without explaining its rule.

We could imagine this society, but we could not imagine calling it

``free.''  Whether or not the incentives in such a society would be better

or more efficiently allocated, such a society could not be known as free.

The ideals of freedom, of life within a free society, demand more than

efficient application.  Instead, openness and transparency are the

constraints within which a legal system gets built, not options to be

added if convenient to the leaders.  Life governed by software code should

be no less.

Code writing is not litigation.  It is better, richer, more

productive. But the law is an obvious instance of how creativity and

incentives do not depend upon perfect control over the products created.

Like jazz, or novels, or architecture, the law gets built upon the work

that went before. This adding and changing is what creativity always is.

And a free society is one that assures that its most important resources

remain free in just this sense.\footnote{This quotation is Copyright

\end{quotation}

In essence, lawyers are paid to service the shared commons of legal

infrastructure.  Few defend themselves in court or write their own briefs

(even though they legally permitted to do so) because everyone would

prefer to have an expert do that job.

The Free Software economy is a market that is ripe for experts.  It

functions similarly to other well established professional fields like the

law.  The GPL, in turn, serves as the legal scaffolding that permits the

creation of this vibrant commercial and non-commercial Free Software

economy.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\chapter{Copying, Modifying and Redistributing}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\chapter{Defending Freedom On Many Fronts}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\chapter{Odds, Ends, and Absolutely No Warranty}

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

\chapter{Business Models, Internal Use, and Compliance}

\appendix

\chapter{The GNU General Public License}

\begin{center}

{\parindent 0in

Version 2, June 1991

Copyright \copyright\ 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

\bigskip

59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307, USA

\bigskip

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies

of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.

}

\end{center}

\begin{center}

{\bf\large Preamble}

\end{center}

The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to

share and change it.  By contrast, the GNU General Public License is

intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software---to

make sure the software is free for all its users.  This General Public

License applies to most of the Free Software Foundation's software and to

any other program whose authors commit to using it.  (Some other Free

Software Foundation software is covered by the GNU Library General Public

License instead.)  You can apply it to your programs, too.

When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price.

Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the

freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service

if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it,

that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs;

and that you know you can do these things.

To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to

deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights.  These

restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you

distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it.

For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or

for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have.  You

must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code.  And

you must show them these terms so they know their rights.

We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2)

offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy,

distribute and/or modify the software.

Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain that

everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free software.  If

the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we want its

recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so that any

problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors'

reputations.

Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents.

We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will

individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program

proprietary.  To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must

be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.

The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and

modification follow.

\begin{center}

{\Large \sc Terms and Conditions For Copying, Distribution and

  Modification}

\end{center}

%\renewcommand{\theenumi}{\alpha{enumi}}

\begin{enumerate}

\addtocounter{enumi}{-1}

This License applies to any program or other work which contains a notice

placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under the

terms of this General Public License.  The ``Program'', below, refers to

any such program or work, and a ``work based on the Program'' means either

the Program or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a

work containing the Program or a portion of it, either verbatim or with

modifications and/or translated into another language.  (Hereinafter,

translation is included without limitation in the term ``modification''.)

Each licensee is addressed as ``you''.

Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not

covered by this License; they are outside its scope.  The act of

running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program

is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the

Program (independent of having been made by running the Program).

Whether that is true depends on what the Program does.

\item You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source

  code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously

  and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice

  and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to

  this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other

  recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program.

You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and you

may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee.

\item

You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion

of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and

distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1

above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:

\begin{enumerate}

You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that

you changed the files and the date of any change.

\item

You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in

whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any

part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third

parties under the terms of this License.

\item

If the modified program normally reads commands interactively

when run, you must cause it, when started running for such

interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an

announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a

notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide

a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under

these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this

License.  (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but

does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on

the Program is not required to print an announcement.)

\end{enumerate}

These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole.  If

identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program,

and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in

themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those

sections when you distribute them as separate works.  But when you

distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based

on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of

this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the

entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.

Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest

your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to

exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or

collective works based on the Program.

In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program

with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of

a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under

the scope of this License.

\item

You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,

under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of

Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:

\begin{enumerate}

\item

Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable

source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections

1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

\item

Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three

years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your

cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete

machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be

distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium

customarily used for software interchange; or,

\item

Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer

to distribute corresponding source code.  (This alternative is

allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you

received the program in object code or executable form with such

an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)

\end{enumerate}

The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for

making modifications to it.  For an executable work, complete source

code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any

associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to

control compilation and installation of the executable.  However, as a

special exception, the source code distributed need not include

anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary

form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the

operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component

itself accompanies the executable.

If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering

access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent

access to copy the source code from the same place counts as

distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not

compelled to copy the source along with the object code.

\item

You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program

except as expressly provided under this License.  Any attempt

otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is

void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License.

However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under

this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such

parties remain in full compliance.

\item

You are not required to accept this License, since you have not

signed it.  However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or

distribute the Program or its derivative works.  These actions are

prohibited by law if you do not accept this License.  Therefore, by

modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the

Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and

all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying

the Program or works based on it.

\item

Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the

Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the

original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to

these terms and conditions.  You may not impose any further

restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.

You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to

this License.

\item

If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent

infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues),

conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or

otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not

excuse you from the conditions of this License.  If you cannot

distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this

License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you

may not distribute the Program at all.  For example, if a patent

license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by

all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then

the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to

refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.

If any portion of this section is held invalid or unenforceable under

any particular circumstance, the balance of the section is intended to

apply and the section as a whole is intended to apply in other

circumstances.

It is not the purpose of this section to induce you to infringe any

patents or other property right claims or to contest validity of any

such claims; this section has the sole purpose of protecting the

integrity of the free software distribution system, which is

implemented by public license practices.  Many people have made

generous contributions to the wide range of software distributed

through that system in reliance on consistent application of that

system; it is up to the author/donor to decide if he or she is willing

to distribute software through any other system and a licensee cannot

impose that choice.

This section is intended to make thoroughly clear what is believed to

be a consequence of the rest of this License.

\item

If the distribution and/or use of the Program is restricted in

certain countries either by patents or by copyrighted interfaces, the

original copyright holder who places the Program under this License

may add an explicit geographical distribution limitation excluding

those countries, so that distribution is permitted only in or among

countries not thus excluded.  In such case, this License incorporates

the limitation as if written in the body of this License.

\item

The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions

of the General Public License from time to time.  Such new versions will

be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to

address new problems or concerns.

Each version is given a distinguishing version number.  If the Program

specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and ``any

later version'', you have the option of following the terms and conditions

either of that version or of any later version published by the Free

Software Foundation.  If the Program does not specify a version number of

this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software

Foundation.

\item

If you wish to incorporate parts of the Program into other free

programs whose distribution conditions are different, write to the author

to ask for permission.  For software which is copyrighted by the Free

Software Foundation, write to the Free Software Foundation; we sometimes

make exceptions for this.  Our decision will be guided by the two goals

of preserving the free status of all derivatives of our free software and

of promoting the sharing and reuse of software generally.

\begin{center}

{\Large\sc

No Warranty