Changeset - f61dad4e0e75
[Not reviewed]
0 3 0
Bradley M. Kuhn - 21 years ago 2003-05-28 23:01:46
bkuhn@fsf.org
* Wrote most of GPL Section 0 Section
3 files changed with 93 insertions and 4 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
GPL-Business/ChangeLog
Show inline comments
 
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.
 
	(chapter{Copying, Modifying and Redistributing}): Started chapter.
 
	(section{GPL, \S 0: Freedom to Run}): Wrote most of the section.
 

	
 
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.
GPL-Business/gpl-business.kpr
Show inline comments
 
binary diff not shown
GPL-Business/gpl-business.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -511,246 +511,333 @@ 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
 
  \copyright{} 2002, Lawrence Lessig.  Verbatim copying of this quotation
 
  in its entirety is permitted provided this notice is preserved.}
 
  \copyright{} 2002, Lawrence Lessig.  It is licensed under the terms of
 
  \href{http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/}{the ``Attribution
 
    License'', version 1.0} or any later version as published by Creative
 
  Commons.}
 
\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}
 

	
 
This chapter begins the deep discussion of the details of the terms of
 
GPL\@.  In this chapter, we consider the core terms: GPL \S\S 0--3.  These
 
are the sections of the GPL that fundamentally define the legal details of
 
how software freedom is respected.
 

	
 
\section{GPL, \S 0: Freedom to Run}
 

	
 
\S 0, the opening section of GPL, sets forth that the work is governed by
 
copyright law.  It specifically points out that it is the ``copyright
 
holder'' who decides if a work is licensed under its terms, and explains
 
how the copyright holder might indicate this fact.
 

	
 
A bit more subtly, \S 0 makes an inference that copyright law is the only
 
system under which it is governed.  Specifically, it states:
 
\begin{quote}
 
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
 
covered by this License; they are outside its scope.
 
\end{quote}
 
In essence, the license governs \emph{only} those activites and all other
 
activities are unrestricted, provided that no other agreements trump GPL
 
(which they cannot; see Sections~\ref{GPLs6} and~\ref{GPLs7}).  This is
 
very important, because the Free Software community heavily supports
 
users' rights to ``fair use'' and ``unregulated use'' of copyrighted
 
material.  GPL asserts through this clause that it supports users' rights
 
to fair and unregulated uses.
 

	
 
Fair use of copyrighted material is an established legal doctrine that
 
permits certain activities.  Discussion of the various types of fair use
 
activity are beyond the scope of this tutorial.  However, one important
 
example of fair use is the right to reverse engineering software.
 

	
 
Fair use is a doctrine established by the courts or by statute.  By
 
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 program like a
 
novel for the purpose of learning how to be a better programmer.
 

	
 
\medskip
 

	
 
Thus, the GPL protects users fair and uregulated use rights precisely by
 
not attempting to cover them.  Furthermore, the GPL ensures the freedom
 
to run specifically by stating the following:
 
\begin{quote}
 
The act of running the Program is not restricted
 
\end{quote}
 
Thus, users are explicitly given the freedom to run by \S 0.
 

	
 
\medskip
 

	
 
The bulk of \S 0 not mentioned here gives definitions for other terms used
 
throughout.  The only one worth discussing in detail is ``work based on
 
the Program''.  The reason this definition is particular interesting is
 
that 
 

	
 

	
 
\section{GPL, \S 1}
 

	
 
\section{GPL, \S 2}
 

	
 
\section{GPL, \S 3}
 

	
 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 
\chapter{Defending Freedom On Many Fronts}
 

	
 
\section{GPL, Section 4}
 

	
 
\section{GPL, Section 5}
 
\label{GPLs5}
 

	
 
\section{GPL, Section 6}
 
\label{GPLs6}
 

	
 
\section{GPL, Section 7}
 
\label{GPLs7}
 

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

	
 
There was a case where the disclaimer of a contract was negated because it
 
was not "conspicuous" to the person entering into the contract.  Therefore,
 
to make such language "conspicuous" people started bolding it.  My question
 
has always been, does that mean all the other parts of the document aren't
 
important such that they too need to be "conspicuous."
 

	
 
As for disclaiming warranties, remember that there are many types of
 
warranties, and in some jurisdictions some of them cannot be disclaimed.
 
Therefore, usually agreements will have both a warranty disclaimer and a
 
limitation of liability.  The former gets rid of everything that can be
 
gotten rid of, while the latter limits the liability of the actor for any
 
warranties that cannot be disclaimed (such as personal injury, etc.).
 

	
 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 
\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}
 

	
 
\item 
 
\item
 

	
 
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}
 

	
 
\item 
 
\item
 

	
 
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,
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)