Post #218,324
8/9/05 2:50:59 AM
|
GPL, Version 3
I'm attempting to relocate the discussion of the GPLv3 here for two reasons. Firstly, things are getting a little ventilated over in Linux, and secondly, that's not the right forum.
OK, so let's summarise:
Point One: The GPL v3 is an attempt to close the loophole whereby I, as Software Vendor X, can take a GPLed product, modify it, and then deploy it in production without having to provide the source; typically, this scenario is a Web Service. This is a change from the allowable behaviour under the GPL v2.
Point Two: Some current businesses are built around the model of behaviour that the GPL v2 allows. If their platform is licenced under GPL v3, it could be argued that they will lose their competitive advantage (i.e. the proprietary modifications to the GPL v2 licenced platform). Conversely, it could be argued that if that's your sole or major competitive advantage, then you suck.
Point Three: The Free Software Foundation is not in the business of making business's life easier. They are an ideological organisation whose goal is quite simply the ability to have the right to share software, learn from it, and have your contributions shared also.
Discuss, but keep it cool. It's only software.
Peter
[link|http://www.ubuntulinux.org|Ubuntu Linux]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
|
Post #218,332
8/9/05 7:27:37 AM
|
Yeah, I should have branched this far earlier...
Hell, I should have started it here. My bad.
Anywho, you missed my point. SMBs won't take up and modify software exposed to any third party because of this, and a tremendous opportunity for IT in general will be lost. And THAT sucks; THAT's why I am so tremendously disappointed with the FSF. What could have been a renaissance for IT will not happen (if this thing is taken up AND businesses do not drive a major licensing fork), and just because the FSF has decided that running=distribution. What REALLY irks me though is that the impetus for this change seems not to be 'freedom', but resentment over profits. Look at most of the replies in the other thread.
[link|http://www.runningworks.com|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #218,372
8/9/05 12:15:32 PM
|
In what way
SMBs won't take up and modify software exposed to any third party because of this, and a tremendous opportunity for IT in general will be lost. What opportunity is being lost here? And how does that opportunity compare to the public gain in freely accessable code under the GPL? Jay
|
Post #218,380
8/9/05 12:35:19 PM
|
Employment.
In non ISV (read: the bulk of development) shops. IT development is in trouble; should the opportunity to optimise/customise software be downgraded by business because there is no advantage to doing it, then a great opportunity may be lost.
If GPLed software were to become widely used in SMBs, those SMBs would naturally want to customise it (hell, I've been called on to customise software I don't have source code for enough times - a real PITA). Demand for coders with experience with said software would rise (possibly skyrocket)*.
As I stated in the previous thread, however, I may be blowing this out of proportion due to a perception of the AGPL as the basis for the web services clause (so widely discussed) in GPLv3.
We'll see when the first draft is actually released. Then you may hear me go ballistic on this subject again. I hope not, though.
* And yes, don't repeat it again, I know whether programmers have work is of absolutely no concern to the FSF. It is, however, a concern of developers.
[link|http://www.runningworks.com|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #218,421
8/9/05 6:14:11 PM
|
We shall see
We'll see when the first draft is actually released. Then you may hear me go ballistic on this subject again. I hope not, though. We shall see, I'll admit to having worries of my own about the actual writing of the clause. It liable to be a rather delicate dance as what is being sold is a lot less concrete when your talking about services. Too loose and companies will be able to get around the GPL entirly by saying they are not selling an application but rather a local self-hosted service provider. Too strict and it becomes impossible to include any GPL software anywhere in your system without it covering the entire system. Jay
|
Post #218,426
8/9/05 6:20:18 PM
|
GAH.
"not selling an application but rather a local self-hosted service provider"
There is NOTHING wrong with that, and it doesn't volate the GPL even in spirit.
Unless of course using source code to your own advantage, when the binaries are not distributed, s now somehow a bad thing.
[link|http://www.runningworks.com|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #218,427
8/9/05 6:25:28 PM
|
Re: GAH.
Binary == local self-hosted service provider except it has a HTTP interface rather then a command line.
Jay
|
Post #218,429
8/9/05 6:40:18 PM
|
Try this
I am renting to you a box that is running a web-based application based on modified GPL components. The box only has inputs for the keyboard and monitor. Though you are running the application, you don't actually have the binary. Did I distribute?
What if I host the box for you in my rack?
What if you don't rent the box, but instead time-share access to it?
What if your only payment to me is your email address and permission to send you ads?
Congratulations, you've just defined "hosting a registration-required web site" as "distributing a binary".
===
Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
|
Post #218,436
8/9/05 7:04:10 PM
8/9/05 7:06:09 PM
|
No, Drew. YOU did.
You are renting me a box.
You are licensing me to use the box.
The box has a copy of the binary.
You have licensed me a COPY of the binary.
the GPL LICENSE applies. Other licenses do not supercede it.
Next.
Time-share is NOT distributing a binary, though. If your modified binary is being used, and the binary has not been copied, moved, lives, exists, or has otherwise been transferred, there is no distribution of said binary. It's only being used, and USE is NOT distribution, however you may want to redefine the word.
[link|http://www.runningworks.com|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
Edited by imric
Aug. 9, 2005, 07:06:09 PM EDT
|
Post #218,446
8/9/05 7:19:10 PM
|
Yeah, I was agreeing with you
If we go down the path of defining a web service as distribution for the purposes of GPLv3, what's to stop Oracle from taking whatever GPLv2 tools they want, packaging them up with their product, and providing that on a managed box you rent from them? Think any businesses would go for that package? I do.
===
Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
|
Post #218,457
8/9/05 7:40:56 PM
|
*chuckle* Sorry. Paranoia at work.
[link|http://www.runningworks.com|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #218,386
8/9/05 2:21:01 PM
|
Re: GPL, Version 3
My objection to the change in GPL V3 is that originally, "Point One" WASN'T A LOOPHOLE.
At one point in time, when someone raised the possibility of it *being* a loophole on one of the FSF's GPL discussion forums on usenet (back in the mid-90's), Richard Stallman Himself replied that it was a perfectly valid use of the GPL to modify software and run a web server using that modified software without distributing the source. I remember this conversation because at the time I was researching a (ultimately ridiculously badly written) article on the GPL for OS/2 e-Zine!
That it is considered a loophole *now* is a bit of historical revisionism on the part of the FSF.
I consider this a disappointing move on the FSF's part, and will probably find jolly ways to ridicule them in the months to come.
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #218,390
8/9/05 2:34:46 PM
8/9/05 2:35:01 PM
|
That is interesting
wonder if it could be found at [link|http://www.deja.com|http://www.deja.com] (er Google Groups)
Darrell Spice, Jr. [link|http://spiceware.org/gallery/ArtisticOverpass|Artistic Overpass]\n[link|http://www.spiceware.org/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
Edited by SpiceWare
Aug. 9, 2005, 02:35:01 PM EDT
|
Post #218,392
8/9/05 2:41:16 PM
|
Maybe.
I imagine it would take some doing though. The only other thing I remember about the discussion in that forum at the time was whether or not it was legal to create a plugin licensed under the GPL for a proprietary browser (the answer from RMS was no, because the browser was not exempted under the GPL like an operating system was). *That* one interested me because I was trying to figure out whether or not a GPL'd applications that hooked into OS/2's Workplace Shell would be considered illegal, since the WPS was not technically part of the operating system, but sat on top of it. Stallman actually emailed me about that one saying that it would fall under the exemption, but that I should stop using proprietary operating systems. :)
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #218,397
8/9/05 3:09:07 PM
8/9/05 3:16:35 PM
|
I found it!
The petard-hoisting begins now!
[link|http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/browse_frm/thread/ae52507c74c3ebac/|http://groups.google...ae52507c74c3ebac/]
(edited link to actually point to the RMS post)
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
Edited by cwbrenn
Aug. 9, 2005, 03:16:35 PM EDT
|
Post #218,398
8/9/05 3:13:15 PM
|
*chuckle*
[link|http://www.runningworks.com|
] Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #218,399
8/9/05 3:24:44 PM
|
But note that...
by the end of that year Bruce Perens was talking about this as a loophole and had ideas on how to fix it.
It may well be that RMS' opinion changed in the intervening 6 years. I consider that fair and reasonable, my opinions on lots of things have changed in the last 6 years.
However if he did come out with something like this, I'd be amused as well.
Cheers,
Ben
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|
Post #218,402
8/9/05 3:26:04 PM
|
On the other hand...
Bruce Perens is a dialectical anomaly and changes his mind about everything at least twice a year. :)
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #218,410
8/9/05 4:21:39 PM
|
You change tactics, not philosophy
In some cases, I would agree that it is antisocial to make a useful
modification and not release it. But if a license made that illegal,
if a license did not allow people to make and use their own private
changes, without publishing them, I would consider the license
unacceptably restrictive. People should always have the right to
share with their neighbors, but compelling people to share can be
wrong, especially when it conflicts with privacy rights. He's talking philosophy there. When you change that, you're probably a hypocrit. Let's see if he can bring himself to say, "I was wrong." ===
Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
|
Post #218,415
8/9/05 4:35:32 PM
|
Point
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|
