The last software licence you’ll need?

• Article 10 of 16
• LinuxUser & Developer, March 2006
• View a PDF of the original article

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | All 3 Pages

Few software licences have caused even a fraction of the controversy that the GNU Public Licence (GPL) has caused. Developed in 1989 by Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation (FSF), the GPL has been described as “communist”, “Pacman-like”, “a cancer”, “anti-American”, “viral” and “anti-business”. There’s been so much FUD surrounding it that to this day, many companies believe erroneously that simply using software licensed under the GPL will force them to publish their internal software’s source code.

So it was with some alarm that certain quarters greeted the announcement last year by the Free Software Foundation that it was planning to update the GPL. Many assumed, for example, that Stallman and the FSF would amend the GPL to prohibit interaction with web services unless their source code was published. By the time the FSF released the first draft of the proposed update in January of this year, various groups had convinced themselves the FSF was intent on nationalising their businesses and prohibiting money-making from GPL software.

Instead, the FSF released a relatively benign first draft of the GPL, version three. Although there were some new clauses and amendments that gave concern to various companies and company lawyers, most were relieved. Nevertheless, there are many still feeling uneasy about the GPLv3. What are their worries and are they justified?

The last big update to the GPL was in 1991 when version two was released. Version two was actually a slackening of the terms of version one: the FSF had come to the conclusion that version one was hindering the adoption of free software and decided to make it less restrictive. Since those amendments, the GPL has remained virtually unaltered.

Nonetheless, the industry has moved on and there have been various developments that have caused the FSF concern. Most notably, DRM (digital rights/restrictions management) and patents have become a new method, whether intentional or not, for companies and governments to curtail the spread of free software.

As Eben Moglen, general counsel of the FSF, explained during a conference to unveil the new GPL, “Our goal is to make clear that GPL software may not be used to create forms where tinkered versions will not run or will not run for the same purposes on the same data… When the mechanisms of freedom are used to create unfreedom, it goes further than the GPL can possibly be expected to follow and we will not go there.”

Both Stallman and the FSF intend, therefore, to use the new version of the GPL to stop DRM and patents being used in conjunction with free software. They also intend for it to stop companies such as Tivo, the US personal video recorder manufacturer, from using GPL software for spyware. Currently, Tivo’s Linux-based recorders report back their owners viewing habits, something Stallman describes as being close to the edge of legality under the GPL and which he’d like to stop.

But the GPL revision isn’t just an opportunity to mark a line in the road that “unfree” software techniques must not cross. It’s as much an opportunity to clear up language and foster free software growth.

One of the ambitions for version three is to harmonise the GPL as much as possible with the different contract and copyright laws around the world. The GPL, of course, is not a contract. But to stop it being considered as a potential contract in some jurisdictions, some changes in wording are necessary. At the moment, the GPL only really takes heed of US law.

Another issue is the compatibility with other free software licences, the number of which has grown considerably since 1991. Combining software that operate under different licences can be difficult or even impossible, so another goal of revising the GPL has been to make the GPL more compatible with other licences through new clauses that explain what terms from other licences can be acceptably combined with the GPL.

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | All 3 Pages