Collaborative GPL Compliance Through Non-Profits

Bradley M. Kuhn

Thursday 11 October 2012

Nature of Free Software Community

• Through the eyes of a GPL enforcer …

• The Free Software Community is separated into two equally important groups:
  • The permissively licensed, who use social pressure to liberate code.
  • The copyleft licensed, whose license requires liberation.

• (Copyright infringement shouldn’t be a crime, BTW: this is just an analogy.

On Requirement By License

• Social pressure does work …
  • … and should be used (and is), even for copylefted software.
  • … enforcement is a last resort.
• GPL == Constitution of Software Freedom Land.
  • a “written down” embodiment of core principles.
• GPL’s a detailed implementation of the four freedoms:
  • freedom to run and study.
  • freedom to improve.
  • freedom to share.
  • freedom to share improvements.

How GPL Works (In Reality)

• What do you do when someone violates?
  • (and social pressure for compliance fails)?
• Copyright enforcement
  • … (yes, similar stuff to what the MPAA does: EEP!)
  • … but for a good cause: the four freedoms.
  • “using the tools of the oppressor against the oppressor”

“Traditional” Compliance

• FSF asked for copyright assignment to enforce for some GNU packages.

• FSF’s roles were admittedly tough to consider separately:
  • Employer of the authors of many GNU packages
  • copyright holder of package copyrights.
  • author of GPL & related licenses.
  • advocacy organization for software freedom.

• Confusion is really just victim of being first.

• (Full Disclosure: I’m on FSF’s Board of Directors … but also …)

Compliance: Service to Developers

• I’m Executive Director of Software Freedom Conservancy.

• Conservancy gives a wide range of services to projects.

• Compliance is just (rather mundanely) “one of those services.

Compliance is Boring

• Conservancy does the boring stuff so developers don’t have to.

• Compliance certainly qualifies.

• Almost like a service provider …
  • … but more like a place for collaboration.

Compliance As Collaboration

• Multiple Conservancy projects are GPL or LGPL.

• Nearly all agree on compliance goals:
  • Simply this: work with violators to get a source release that works.
• Conservancy does the work:
  • giving updates to copyright holders involved …
  • … using the tried-and-true, simple Free Software community tool:
  • just a mailing list.

Who Can Join?

• Any copyright holder on an existing Conservancy project can request.
  • approval for a compliance program required by projects’ leadership committee.
• Linux developers can join …
  • … even though Linux proper isn’t a Conservancy project.
  • They join through a “special” project …
  • GPL Compliance Project for Linux Developers.

Why Special Case Linux?

• Linux violations are rampant.

• Frankly, BusyBox developers asked if we could engage.

• Also, various Linux developers …
  • … like Matthew Garrett …
  • … had bugged Conservancy for years to help with enforcement.

• GPL Compliance Project for Linux Developers gives structure to Linux compliance activity.

Please Never Forget

• GPL compliance is (roughly) only about 5–10% of what Conservancy does.

• Most of what we do is so boring, no wants to hear me talk about it.

More Info / Talk License

• My more complete talk on Compliance will be tomorrow, 16:20 in this room.

• URLs / Social Networking / Email:
  • Conservancy: sfconservancy.org & @conservancy
  • Me: faif.us, ebb.org/bkuhn & @bkuhn (identi.ca)
  • GPL violations: <compliance@sfconservancy.org>
  • Slides: ebb.org/bkuhn/talks & gitorious.org/bkuhn/talks (source)