diff --git a/GPL-LGPL/new-gpl-lgpl.tex b/GPL-LGPL/new-gpl-lgpl.tex
index 0a976ae86ad4c43fb878cca11571810093791e41..6b16ebf7bc2a1a8ed112982defe720d6d27a8659 100644
--- a/GPL-LGPL/new-gpl-lgpl.tex
+++ b/GPL-LGPL/new-gpl-lgpl.tex
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 %      Tutorial Text for the Detailed Study and Analysis of GPL and LGPL course
 %
-% Copyright (C) 2003, 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+% Copyright (C) 2003, 2004, 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
 
 % Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire document is permitted in
 % any medium, provided this notice is preserved.
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
 \vfill
 
 {\Large
-{\sc Detailed Study and Analysis of the GPL and LGPL  } \\
+{\sc The GPL and Legal Aspects of Free Software Development } \\
 
 \vfill
 
@@ -46,36 +46,35 @@
 
 % \vspace{.3in}
 
-Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA \\
+Columbia Law School, New York, NY, USA \\
 \vspace{.1in}
-Tuesday, 24 August 2004
+Wednesday, 28 September 2005
 }
 
 %\vspace{.7in}
 \vfill
 
 {\large
-Bradley M. Kuhn
+Daniel Ravicher
 
-Executive Director
+Senior Counsel 
 
 Free Software Foundation
+
+President and Executive Director
+
+Public Patent Foundation
 }
 
 \vspace{.3in}
 
 
 {\large
-Daniel Ravicher
+David Turner
 
-Senior Counsel 
+GPL Compliance Engineer
 
 Free Software Foundation
-
-President and Executive Director
-
-Public Patent Foundation
-
 }
 
 \end{center}
@@ -83,7 +82,7 @@ Public Patent Foundation
 \vfill
 
 {\parindent 0in
-Copyright \copyright{} 2003, 2004 \hspace{.2in} Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+Copyright \copyright{} 2003, 2004, 2005 \hspace{.2in} Free Software Foundation, Inc.
 
 \vspace{.3in}
 
@@ -97,79 +96,98 @@ any medium, provided this notice is preserved.
 
 \pagenumbering{roman}
 
-\chapter*{Detailed Study and Analysis of the GPL and LGPL}
+\chapter*{The GPL and Legal Aspects of Free Software Development}
 
-\textit{Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 24 August 2004}
+\textit{Columbia Law School, New York, NY, 28 September 2005}
 
 \begin{tabular}[t]{ll}
 09:00 - 09:25 & Registration / Check-in / Continental Breakfast\\
 &\\
 09:25 - 09:30 & Welcome\\
 &\\
-09:30 - 10:00 & Free Software Principles and the Free Software Definition\\
-& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
-&\\
-10:00 - 10:10 & Preamble of the GNU General Public License (GPL)\\
-& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
-&\\
-10:10 - 10:35 & GPL, \S 0: Definitions, etc.\\
-& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
-&\\
-10:35 - 10:50 & GPL, \S 1: Grant for Verbatim Source Copying\\
-& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
+09:30 - 10:30 & The Basics of How Software is Constructed\\
+& \textit{David Turner}\\
 &\\
-10:50 - 11:00 & Q \& A\\
+10:30 - 11:15 & The Free Software Ecosystem\\
+& \textit{David Turner}\\
 &\\
-11:00 - 11:10 & Break\\
+11:15 - 11:30 & Break\\
 &\\
-11:10 - 11:55 & Derivative Works: Statute and Case Law\\
+11:30 - 12:15 & How Copyright Law Applies to Software\\
 & \textit{Daniel Ravicher}\\
 &\\
+12:15 - 13:30 & Lunch with Lecture, ``GPL, Version 3''\\
+& \textit{Prof. Eben Moglen}\\
+&\\
 \end{tabular}
 
 \begin{tabular}[t]{ll}
-11:55 - 12:20 & GPL, \S 2: Grants for Source Derivative Works\\
-& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
-&\\
-12:20 - 12:30 & Q \& A\\
-&\\
-12:30 - 14:00 & Lunch with Lecture "Patents and Free Software"\\
-& \textit{Prof. Eben Moglen}\\
-&\\
-14:00 - 14:20 & GPL, \S 3 Grants for Creating Binary Derivative Works\\
-& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
-&\\
-14:20 - 14:40 & The Implied Patent Grant in the GPL\\
+13:30 - 15:30 & How the GPL Works from a Distributor Perspective\\
 & \textit{Daniel Ravicher}\\
 &\\
-14:40 - 15:25 & GPL, \S 4: Termination of License\\
-& GPL, \S 5: Acceptance of License\\
-& GPL, \S 6: Prohibition on Further Restrictions\\
-& GPL, \S 7: Conflicts with other Agreements or Orders\\
-& GPL, \S 8: International Licensing Issues\\
-& GPL, \S 10: Copyright Holder's Exceptions to the GPL\\
-& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
+15:30 - 15:45 & Break\\
 &\\
-15:25 - 15:35 & GPL, \S 11: Disclaimer of Warranties\\
-& GPL, \S 12: Limitation of Liability\\
+15:45 - 17:15 & GPL Compliance\\
 & \textit{Daniel Ravicher}\\
 &\\
-15:35 - 15:45 & Q \& A\\
-&\\
-15:45 - 16:00 & Break\\
-&\\
-16:00 - 17:30 & GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL)\\
-& \textit{Bradley M. Kuhn}\\
+17:15 - 18:00 & Future ConsiderationsGNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL)\\
+& \textit{Daniel Ravicher}\\
 &\\
-17:30 - 18:00 & Q \& A\\
 \end{tabular}
 
+\chapter*{About the Speakers}
+
+\section*{Eben Moglen}
+
+Eben Moglen is Professor of Law and Legal History at Columbia
+University Law School and General Counsel of the Free Software
+Foundation. Professor Moglen earned his PhD in History and law degree
+at Yale University during what he sometimes calls his "long, dark
+period" in New Haven. After law school he clerked for Judge Edward
+Weinfeld of the United States District Court in New York City and to
+Justice Thurgood Marshall of the United States Supreme Court. He has
+taught at Columbia Law School -- and has held visiting appointments at
+Harvard University, Tel-Aviv University and the University of Virginia
+-- since 1987. In 2003 he was given the Electronic Frontier
+Foundation's Pioneer Award for efforts on behalf of freedom in the
+electronic society.
+
+\section*{Daniel Ravicher}
+
+Dan Ravicher is a registered patent attorney with extensive experience
+litigating, licensing, prosecuting, and otherwise counseling clients
+with respect to patents. Prior to founding PUBPAT, Mr. Ravicher was
+associated with the patent law practice groups of Skadden, Arps,
+Slate, Meagher \& Flom LLP, Brobeck, Phleger \& Harrison, LLP, and
+Patterson, Belknap, Webb \& Tyler, LLP, all in New York, and served the
+Honorable Randall R. Rader, Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of
+Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C.  Mr. Ravicher has
+published several legal articles and given numerous presentations
+regarding patent law.  Mr. Ravicher received his law degree from the
+University of Virginia School of Law, where he was the Class of 2000
+Franklin O'Blechman Scholar, a Mortimer Caplin Public Service Award
+recipient and Editor of the Virginia Journal of Law and Technology,
+and his bachelors degree in materials science magna cum laude with
+University Honors from the University of South Florida.
+
+\section*{David Turner}
+
+David Turner has been a GNU GPL Compliance Engineer for the Free
+Software Foundation for three and a half years.  Mr. Turner consults
+with companies and individuals about free software licensing in
+general, focusing on the FSF's licenses.  Mr. Turner has given
+presentations on the GPL around the world.  In addition, Mr. Turner
+has written software to help manage copyright assignments and
+determine copyright ownership. He has experience with several
+languages including C, Python, Perl and Java.  Mr. Turner is presently
+working on the next version of the GNU GPL.
+
 \chapter*{Preface}
 
-This one-day course gives a section-by-section explanation of the most
-popular Free Software copyright license, the GNU General Public License
-(GNU GPL), and teaches lawyers, software developers, managers and business
-people how to use the GPL (and GPL'd software) successfully in a new Free
+This one-day course gives an explanation of the most popular Free
+Software copyright license, the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL),
+and teaches lawyers, software developers, managers and business people
+how to use the GPL (and GPL'd software) successfully in a new Free
 Software business and in existing, successful enterprises.
 
 Attendees should have a general familiarity with software development
@@ -273,7 +291,7 @@ Source.''  Besides having a different political focus than those who
 call it Free Software,\footnote{The political differences between the
   Free Software Movement and the Open Source Movement are documented
   on FSF's Web site at {\tt
-    http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html}.}
+    http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/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 of the freedom to modify. However, the important issue is
@@ -3791,16 +3809,16 @@ the limitation as if written in the body of this License.
 \textbf{Affero Inc. may publish revised and/or new versions of the Affero
 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.
+address new problems or concerns.}
 
-Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program
+\textbf{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
 Affero, Inc. If the Program does not specify a version number of this
-License, you may choose any version ever published by Affero, Inc.
+License, you may choose any version ever published by Affero, Inc.}
 
-You may also choose to redistribute modified versions of this program
+\textbf{You may also choose to redistribute modified versions of this program
 under any version of the Free Software Foundation's GNU General Public
 License version 3 or higher, so long as that version of the GNU GPL
 includes terms and conditions substantially equivalent to those of
@@ -3847,6 +3865,197 @@ possibility of such damages.}
 
 That's all there is to it!
 
+\chapter{GPL Version 3: Background to Adoption}
+
+\textbf{\textit{\large{by Richard Stallman and Eben Moglen}}}
+
+\smallskip
+
+The GNU General Public License (``the GPL'') has remained
+unmodified, at version level 2, since 1991.  This is extraordinary
+longevity for any widely-employed legal instrument.  The durability of
+the GPL is even more surprising when one takes into account the
+differences between the free software movement at the time of version
+2's release and the situation prevailing in 2005.
+
+Richard M. Stallman, founder of the free software movement and author
+of the GNU GPL, released version 2 in 1991 after taking legal advice
+and collecting developer opinion concerning version 1 of the license,
+which had been in use since 1985.  There was no formal public comment
+process and no significant interim transition period.  The Free
+Software Foundation immediately relicensed the components of the GNU
+Project, which comprised the largest then-existing collection of
+copyleft software assets.  In Finland, Linus Torvalds adopted GPL
+Version 2 for his operating system kernel, called Linux.
+
+That was then, and this is now.  The GPL is employed by tens of
+thousands of software projects around the world, of which the Free
+Software Foundation's GNU system is a tiny fraction.  The GNU system,
+when combined with Linus Torvalds' Linux---which has evolved into a
+flexible, highly-portable, industry-leading operating system kernel
+--- along with Samba, MySQL, and other GPL'd programs, offers superior
+reliability and adaptability to Microsoft's operating systems, at
+nominal cost.  GPL'd software runs on or is embedded in devices
+ranging from cellphones, PDAs and home networking appliances to
+mainframes and supercomputing clusters.  Independent software
+developers around the world, as well as every large corporate IT buyer
+and seller, and a surprisingly large proportion of individual users,
+interact with the GPL.
+
+During the period since 1991, of course, there has developed a
+profusion of free software licenses.  But not in the area covered by
+the GPL.  The ``share and share alike'' or ``copyleft'' aspect of the
+GPL is its most important functional characteristic, and those who
+want to use a copyleft license for software overwhelmingly use the GPL
+rather than inventing their own.
+
+Updating the GPL is therefore a very different task in 2005 than it
+was in 1991.  The substantive reasons for revision, and the likely
+nature of those changes, are subject matter for another essay.  At
+present we would like to concentrate on the institutional, procedural
+aspects of changing the license.  Those are complicated by the fact
+that the GPL serves four distinct purposes.
+
+\section*{The GPL is a Worldwide Copyright License}
+
+As a legal document, the GPL serves a purpose that most legal drafters
+would do anything possible to avoid: it licenses copyrighted material
+for modification and redistribution in every one of the world's
+systems of copyright law.  In general, publishers don't use worldwide
+copyright licenses; for each system in which their works are
+distributed, licensing arrangements tailored to local legal
+requirements are used.  Publishers rarely license redistribution of
+modified or derivative works; when they do so, those licenses are
+tailored to the specific setting, factual and legal.  But free
+software requires legal arrangements that permit copyrighted works to
+follow arbitrary trajectories, in both geographic and genetic terms.
+Modified versions of free software works are distributed from hand to
+hand across borders in a pattern that no copyright holder could
+possibly trace.
+
+GPL version 2 performed the task of globalization relatively well,
+because its design was elegantly limited to a minimum set of copyright
+principles that signatories to the Berne Convention must offer, in one
+form or another, in their national legislation.  But GPL2 was a
+license constructed by one US layman and his lawyers, largely
+concerned with US law.  To the extent possible, and without any
+fundamental changes, GPL3 should ease internationalization
+difficulties, more fully approximating the otherwise unsought ideal of
+the global copyright license.
+
+\section*{The GPL is the Code of Conduct for Free Software Distributors}
+
+Beyond the legal permission that the GPL extends to those who wish to
+copy, modify, and share free software, the GPL also embodies a code of
+industry conduct with respect to the practices by which free software
+is distributed.  Section 3, which explains how to make source code
+available as required under the license, affects product packaging
+decisions for those who embed free software in appliances, as well as
+those who distribute software collections that include both free and
+unfree software.  Section 7, which concerns the effect of licenses,
+judgments, and other compulsory legal interventions incompatible with
+the GPL on the behavior of software distributors, affects patent
+licensing arrangements in connection with industry standards.  And so
+on, through a range of interactions between the requirements of the
+license and evolving practices in the vending of both hardware and
+software.
+
+The Free Software Foundation, through its maintenance and enforcement
+of the GPL, has contributed to the evolution of industry behavior
+patterns beyond its influence as a maker of software.  In revising the
+GPL, the Foundation is inevitably engaged in altering the rules of the
+road for enterprises and market participants of many different kinds,
+with different fundamental interests and radically different levels of
+market power.  The process of drafting and adopting changes to the
+license must thus approximate standard-setting, or ``best practices''
+definition, as well as copyright license drafting.
+
+\section*{The GPL is the Constitution of the Free Software Movement}
+
+The Free Software Foundation has never been reluctant to point out
+that its goals are primarily social and political, not technical or
+economic.  The Foundation believes that free software---that is,
+software that can be freely studied, copied, modified, reused,
+redistributed and shared by its users---is the only ethically
+satisfactory form of software development, as free and open scientific
+research is the only ethically satisfactory context for the conduct of
+mathematics, physics, or biology.  The Foundation, and those who
+support its broader work, regard free software as an essential step in
+a social movement for freer access to knowledge, freer access to
+facilities of communication, and a more deeply participatory culture,
+open to human beings with less regard to existing distributions of
+wealth and social power.  The free software movement has taken
+advantage of the social conditions of its time to found its program on
+the creation of vast new wealth, through new systems of cooperation,
+which can in turn be shared in order to further the creation of new
+wealth, in a positive feedback loop.
+
+This program is not, of course, universally shared by all the parties
+who benefit from the exploitation of the new wealth created by free
+software.  The free software movement has never objected to the
+indirect benefits accruing to those who differ from the movement's
+goals: one of the powerful lessons the movement has learned from
+previous aspects of the long-duration Western movement for freedom of
+expression is the value of working with, rather than against,
+conventional economic interests and concerns.  But the movement's own
+goals cannot be subordinated to the economic interests of our friends
+and allies in industry, let alone those who occasionally contribute
+solely for reasons of their own.  Changes to the GPL, for whatever
+reason they are undertaken, must not undermine the underlying movement
+for freer exchange of knowledge.  To the extent that the movement has
+identified technological or legal measures likely to be harmful to
+freedom, such as ``trusted computing'' or a broadening of the scope of
+patent law, the GPL needs to address those issues from a perspective
+of political principle and the needs of the movement, not from primary
+regard for the industrial or commercial consequences.
+
+\section*{The GPL is the Literary Work of Richard M.\ Stallman}
+
+Some copyright licenses are no doubt known, in the restricted circle
+of one firm or law office, as the achievement of a single author's
+acumen or insight.  But it is safe to say that there is no other
+copyright license in the world that is so strongly identified with the
+achievements, and the philosophy, of a single public figure.  Mr.\
+Stallman remains the GPL's author, with as much right to preserve its
+integrity as a work representative of his intentions as any other
+author or creator.  Under his guidance, the Free Software Foundation,
+which holds the copyright of the GPL, will coordinate and direct the
+process of its modification.
+
+\section*{Conclusion}
+
+The GPL serves, and must continue to serve, multiple purposes.  Those
+purposes are fundamentally diverse, and they inevitably conflict.
+Development of GPL version 3 has been an ongoing process within the
+Free Software Foundation; we, along with our colleagues, have never
+stopped considering possible modifications.  We have consulted,
+formally and informally, a very broad array of participants in the
+free software community, from industry, the academy, and the garage.
+Those conversations have occurred in many countries and several
+languages, over almost two decades, as the technology of software
+development and distribution changed around us.
+
+When a GPLv3 discussion draft is released, the pace of that
+conversation will change, as a particular proposal becomes the
+centerpiece.  The Foundation will, before it emits a first discussion
+draft, publicize the process by which it intends to gather opinion and
+suggestions.  The Free Software Foundation recognizes that the
+reversioning of the GPL is a crucial moment in the evolution of the
+free software community, and the Foundation intends to meet its
+responsibilities to the makers, distributors and users of free
+software.  In doing so, we hope to hear all relevant points of view,
+and to make decisions that reflect the many disparate purposes that
+the license must serve.  Our primary concern remains, as it has been
+from the beginning, the creation and protection of freedom.  We
+recognize that the best protection of freedom is a growing and vital
+community of the free.  We will use the process of public discussion
+of GPL3 drafts to support and nurture the community of the free.
+Proprietary culture imposes both technology and license terms; free
+software means allowing people to understand, experiment and modify
+software, as well as getting involved in the discussion of license
+terms, so that everyone's ideas can contribute to the common good, and
+the development of each contributes to the development of all.
+
 % =====================================================================
 % END OF FIRST DAY SEMINAR SECTION
 % =====================================================================
