diff --git a/compliance-guide.tex b/compliance-guide.tex
index 9d3d1d0944cdf2198835aebfcd0f9d4c41d44059..eb91c4096f614e1de5806abf7126ced2a6cb01b8 100644
--- a/compliance-guide.tex
+++ b/compliance-guide.tex
@@ -744,21 +744,33 @@ generalizations and do not all apply to every alleged violation.
 
 \section{Understanding Who's Enforcing}
 \label{compliance-understanding-whos-enforcing}
-% FIXME: this text needs work.
+% FIXME-LATER: this text needs work.
 
-At FSF, it is part of the mission to spread software freedom. When FSF
+Both  FSF and Conservancy has, as part their mission,  to spread software
+freedom. When FSF or Conservancy
 enforces GPL, the goal is to bring the violator back into compliance as
 quickly as possible, and redress the damage caused by the violation.
 That is FSF's steadfast position in a violation negotiation --- comply
 with the license and respect freedom.
 
-However, other entities who do not share the full ethos of software
-freedom as institutionalized by FSF pursue GPL violations differently.
-MySQL AB, a company that produces the GPL'd MySQL database, upon
-discovering GPL violations typically negotiates a proprietary software
-license separately for a fee. While this practice is not one that FSF
-would ever consider undertaking or even endorsing, it is a legal way for
-copyright holders to proceed.
+However, other entities who do not share the full ethos of software freedom
+as institutionalized by FSF pursue GPL violations differently.  Oracle, a
+company that produces the GPL'd MySQL database, upon discovering GPL
+violations typically negotiates a proprietary software license separately for
+a fee.  While this practice is not one that FSF nor Conservancy would ever
+consider undertaking or even endorsing, it is a legally way for copyright
+holders to proceed.
+
+Generally, GPL enforcers come in two varieties.  First, there are
+Conservancy, FSF, and other ``community enforcers'', who primary seek the
+policy goals of GPL (software freedom), and see financial compensation as
+ultimately secondary to those goals.  Second, there are ``for-profit
+enforcers'' who use the GPL as a either a crippleware license, or sneakily
+induce infringement merely to gain proprietary licensing revenue.
+
+Note that the latter model \texit{only} works for companies who hold 100\% of
+the copyrights in the infringed work.  As such, multi-copyright-held works
+are fully insulated from these tactics.
 
 
 \section{Communication Is Key}