On TechRepublic: Can a dress code prohibit body art?
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

By Martin LaMonica, News.com
Posted on ZDNet News: Jan 17, 2006 9:55:00 PM

CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--Richard Stallman, the founder of the Free Software Foundation, debated proposed changes to the General Public License at a public forum but made it clear that provisions to protect users from patent litigations will remain intact.

Stallman is the author of the original GPL, a license used with countless free and open-source software packages including Linux. On Monday, the Free Software Foundation released a draft document of the GPL version 3, the first major revision in 15 years, written by Stallman and Eben Moglen, general counsel for the Free Software Foundation.

Richard Stallman

The forum, held Tuesday at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, represents one of the first steps of what is expected to be a yearlong debate over the updated GPL. The Free Software Foundation also published a rationale for the proposed changes.

GPL version 3 seeks to protect software users from patent litigation and prevent use of digital rights management technology with GPL software. It also includes a "patent retaliation" clause that prohibits an organization from using privately modified GPL software if it files a patent infringement lawsuit relating to that software.

Although Stallman solicited comments from forum attendees, he made clear that the GPL version 3 will not alter the license's basic stance on software patents. He said that even though Moglen had publicly solicited feedback on the issue, the GPL version 3 is explicitly meant to discourage litigation based on software patents.

"This is not a placeholder. This is the text we currently plan to go with unless we're surprised by seeing a better idea," Stallman said.

GPL version 3 adds an explicit grant of patent rights by anyone redistributing GPL-governed software. In the published rationale, the Free Software Foundation railed against the application of patent law in software, calling it "unwise and ill-considered."

"Software patents threaten every free software project, just as they threaten proprietary software and custom software. Any program can be destroyed or crippled by a software patent belonging to someone who has no other connection to the program," according to the document.

Stallman fielded several detailed legal questions from open-source contributors on several topics, including license compatibility, the patent retaliation clause, trademarks, and issues that arise when GPL software links to non-GPL software, such as mobile phone applications that run on Linux.

For example, Bruce Perens, an open-source consultant and advocate, voiced concern over exceptions that allow a software distributor to link to software components called system libraries. "I see this as giving someone carte blanche to include proprietary components" with GPL software, Perens said.

In response, Stallman said the new version of the GPL makes those exceptions more narrow.

Although many of the legal questions that arose at the forum were very detailed, Forrester Research analyst Michael Gould said that open-source software users, including corporations, would do well to participate in the comment period.

"Corporate legal counsels need to get involved in this process somehow," Goulde said. "The question is either you burn cycles on it today or burn a lot more cycles down the road."

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 84 Talkback(s)
By law they will be required to release it to public domain.
Even with DRM on their work, at the end of their copyright period, they must release it to public domain. So your argument of foreverness being tied up is flawed. DRM and copyright are two different t... (Read the rest)
Posted by: osreinstall Posted on: 01/19/06 You are currently: Logged In | Log out
great license! Linux Geek   | 01/17/06
Geeze, you would think ... Too Old For IT   | 01/18/06
Re: Geeze, you would think ... none none   | 01/18/06
You are such a poser nomorems   | 01/18/06
Looks like a great license, and the final version will be even better. DonnieBoy   | 01/17/06
GPL Terms dhopp@...   | 01/18/06
Simply not true!!! No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
Notice your own wording? techboy_z   | 01/18/06
Copyright protects absolutley nothing. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
Your knowledge of IP law is patthetic! B.O.F.H.   | 01/18/06
Your example proves nothing FamilyManFirst   | 01/18/06
There IS some truth there... el1jones   | 01/18/06
If your argument is that patent review needs overhauled, I agree. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
The idea of a patent CobraA1   | 01/18/06
Is to protect your ideas. osreinstall   | 01/18/06
Re: Is to protect your ideas. none none   | 01/18/06
re: CobraA1   | 01/18/06
Bull! NetArch.   | 01/18/06
The uncreative will be weeded out. osreinstall   | 01/18/06
Actually it is true Linux User 147560   | 01/18/06
More like Karl Marx osreinstall   | 01/18/06
Study your history Linux User 147560   | 01/18/06
Take a reading lesson. osreinstall   | 01/18/06
Squirrels? Linux User 147560   | 01/18/06
Yep Squirrels osreinstall   | 01/18/06
So in a nutshell Linux Guy 1000   | 01/18/06
1000, you are full of BS osreinstall   | 01/18/06
Copying is Stealing Too Old For IT   | 01/18/06
Yes, copying without attribution is stealing. NetArch.   | 01/18/06
That's why nomorems   | 01/18/06
I think mebbe you are lookin at the wrong bunch plumnilly   | 01/18/06
The problem is Michael Kelly   | 01/18/06
What are you talking about? osreinstall   | 01/18/06
I didn't say easy Michael Kelly   | 01/18/06
Patent length & pending application for IAFarm2   | 01/18/06
Easy, Obvious or Simple. It doesn't matter. osreinstall   | 01/18/06
Obviousness DOES Matter dsdjr   | 01/19/06
Here is the link to the article. osreinstall   | 01/19/06
How So? nucrash   | 01/18/06
Good idea, wrong target A.Sinic   | 01/18/06
SPOT ON!!! No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
Re: Good idea, wrong target none none   | 01/18/06
Right target: software patents in general FamilyManFirst   | 01/18/06
Stallman's personal gripe against DRM will end GPLed products No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
I prefer Linus's Stance on DRM nucrash   | 01/18/06
Linus may stay with current GPL No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
Not necessarily... techboy_z   | 01/18/06
STOP thinking DRM is about music and video. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
No it's about Linux User 147560   | 01/18/06
I never thought I "owned" another's property. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
Your right it is more than piracy Linux User 147560   | 01/18/06
Let me try once more, I do NOT care about a silly song or movie! No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
Get a clue Linux User 147560   | 01/18/06
No_Axe nomorems   | 01/18/06
LU, No_Ax has a valid point about non-media DRM. Anton Philidor   | 01/18/06
What more nomorems   | 01/18/06
If you believe that your more fool than I thought. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/19/06
Who exactly does it benefit? CobraA1   | 01/18/06
Maybe in your world, not in mine. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
re: Maybe in your world, not in mine. CobraA1   | 01/18/06
You never owned anything at the company you work for. osreinstall   | 01/18/06
Actually . . . CobraA1   | 01/18/06
It is all 1s and 0s without a working program. osreinstall   | 01/18/06
DRM will not benefit the consumer. Linux User 147560   | 01/18/06
Wrong LU# osreinstall   | 01/18/06
Go back and reinstall your OS again... Linux Guy 1000   | 01/18/06
1000 those blinders work on you a lot better. osreinstall   | 01/18/06
Let them have their DRM, just take their copyright rhavyn   | 01/18/06
By law they will be required to release it to public domain. osreinstall   | 01/19/06
DRM is not about Your medical or financial data, or a companies documents jimbo_z   | 01/18/06
I can see you too are clueless about how DRM works. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/19/06
By users, software distributors or by FOSS programmers? John Le'Brecage   | 01/18/06
DRM is a non-starter Code_Flogger   | 01/18/06
Grow how? No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/19/06
All patents must die [nt] Omch'Ar   | 01/18/06
Why? So my ideas can be stolen by John Zern   | 01/18/06
You mean like Microsoft? nomorems   | 01/18/06
Who said it was ok for MS to do this? John Zern   | 01/19/06
I can see why CobraA1   | 01/18/06
You are right, and it's why it will fail. No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/18/06
We'll see CobraA1   | 01/18/06
Umm hmmm. nomorems   | 01/18/06
DRM and Linux / GNU licence 3, FUD FUD FUD hipparchus2001   | 01/18/06
Keep believing you can change it... No_Ax_to_Grind   | 01/19/06

What do you think?