compliance education that accompanies any constructive enforcement

action. Nevertheless, pursuing damages to the full extent allowed by

copyright law is usually unnecessary, and can in some cases work against

the purpose of copyleft. </li>

<li><strong>Community-oriented compliance work does not request nor accept payment

to overlook problems.</strong>

Community-oriented enforcement cannot accept payments in exchange for

ignoring a violation or accepting incomplete solutions to identified

compliance problems. Ideally, copyright holders should refuse any

payment entirely until the distributor repairs the past violation and

commits formally (in writing) to plans for future compliance.</li>

<li><strong>Community-oriented compliance work starts with carefully

verifying violations and finishes only after a comprehensive

analysis.</strong>

This means fully checking reports and confirming violations before accusing

an entity of violating the GPL. Then, all of the relevant

software should be examined to ensure any compliance problems, beyond

those identified in initial reports and those relating to any clauses of the

relevant licenses, are raised and fixed. This is important so that

the dialogue ends with reasonable assurance for both sides that additional

violations are not waiting to be discovered.

(<a href="http://gpl.guide/pristine-example">Good examples of

compliance</a> already exist to help distributors understand their

obligations.)</li>

<li><strong>Community-oriented compliance processes should extend the

benefit of GPLv3-like termination, even for GPLv2-only

works. </strong> GPLv2 terminates all copyright permissions at the

moment of violation, and that termination is permanent. GPLv3's

termination provision allows first-time violators automatic

restoration of distribution rights when they correct the violation

promptly, and gives the violator a precise list of copyright holders

whose forgiveness it needs. GPLv3's collaborative spirit regarding

termination reflects a commitment to and hope for future cooperation

and collaboration. It's a good idea to follow this approach in

compliance situations stemming from honest mistakes, even when the

violations are on works under GPLv2.</li>

</ul>

<p>These principles are not intended as a strict set of rules.

Achieving compliance requires an understanding of the violator's

situation, not so as to excuse the violation, but so as to see how

to bring that violator into compliance.  Copyleft licenses do not

state specific enforcement methodologies (other than license termination itself)

in part because the real world situation of GPL violations varies;

rigidity impedes success. </p>

<p>In particular, this list of principles purposely does not seek to

create strict criteria and/or “escalation and mediation

rules” for enforcement action. Efforts to do that limit the

ability of copyright holders to use copyleft licenses for their

intended effect: to stand up for the rights of users to copy, modify,

and redistribute free software.</p>

<p>The GPL,

enforced when necessary according to these principles, provides a

foundation for respectful, egalitarian, software-sharing

communities.

</p>