Open Source History And Licenses (15 04 2009)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Open Source History And Licenses (15 04 2009)

on

  • 1,864 views

My slides for af 2,5 hours seminar in Malmoe 15 April 2009 for a Purple Scout client

My slides for af 2,5 hours seminar in Malmoe 15 April 2009 for a Purple Scout client

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,864
Views on SlideShare
1,860
Embed Views
4

Actions

Likes
2
Downloads
98
Comments
0

1 Embed 4

http://www.slideshare.net 4

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Apple Keynote

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • Ad pind 1) Hvad kræver persondataloven? <br /> <br /> Ad pind 2) Og hvad hvis det er en medarbejder, som har oprettet profilen for virksomheden? <br />
  • Ad pind 1) Hvad kræver persondataloven? <br /> <br /> Ad pind 2) Og hvad hvis det er en medarbejder, som har oprettet profilen for virksomheden? <br />
  • Ad pind 1) Hvad kræver persondataloven? <br /> <br /> Ad pind 2) Og hvad hvis det er en medarbejder, som har oprettet profilen for virksomheden? <br />
  • Ad pind 1) Hvad kræver persondataloven? <br /> <br /> Ad pind 2) Og hvad hvis det er en medarbejder, som har oprettet profilen for virksomheden? <br />
  • Ad pind 1) Hvad kræver persondataloven? <br /> <br /> Ad pind 2) Og hvad hvis det er en medarbejder, som har oprettet profilen for virksomheden? <br />
  • Ad pind 1) Hvad kræver persondataloven? <br /> <br /> Ad pind 2) Og hvad hvis det er en medarbejder, som har oprettet profilen for virksomheden? <br />
  • Ad pind 1) Hvad kræver persondataloven? <br /> <br /> Ad pind 2) Og hvad hvis det er en medarbejder, som har oprettet profilen for virksomheden? <br />
  • Ad pind 1) Hvad kræver persondataloven? <br /> <br /> Ad pind 2) Og hvad hvis det er en medarbejder, som har oprettet profilen for virksomheden? <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. <br /> <br /> By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. <br /> <br /> SYSTEM LIBRARIES <br /> However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />
  • <br />

Open Source History And Licenses (15 04 2009) Open Source History And Licenses (15 04 2009) Presentation Transcript

  • Open Source History and Licenses Advokat Martin von Haller Groenbaek Partner, Bender von Haller Dragsted SonyEricsson / Purple Scout, Malmö 2
  • Personalia 2
  • Personalia • Attorney-at-law, Bender von Haller Dragsted 2
  • Personalia • Attorney-at-law, Bender von Haller Dragsted • Co-founder, Open Source Vendors Ass. (OSL) 2
  • Personalia • Attorney-at-law, Bender von Haller Dragsted • Co-founder, Open Source Vendors Ass. (OSL) • Co-founder, Creative Commons DK 2
  • Personalia • Attorney-at-law, Bender von Haller Dragsted • Co-founder, Open Source Vendors Ass. (OSL) • Co-founder, Creative Commons DK • Co-founder, Danish Internet Society Chapter 2
  • Personalia • Attorney-at-law, Bender von Haller Dragsted • Co-founder, Open Source Vendors Ass. (OSL) • Co-founder, Creative Commons DK • Co-founder, Danish Internet Society Chapter 2
  • Personalia • Attorney-at-law, Bender von Haller Dragsted • Co-founder, Open Source Vendors Ass. (OSL) • Co-founder, Creative Commons DK • Co-founder, Danish Internet Society Chapter • http://suse.groenbaek.net/openlife 2
  • Personalia • Attorney-at-law, Bender von Haller Dragsted • Co-founder, Open Source Vendors Ass. (OSL) • Co-founder, Creative Commons DK • Co-founder, Danish Internet Society Chapter • http://suse.groenbaek.net/openlife • http://www.linkedin.com/in/vonhaller 2
  • Personalia • Attorney-at-law, Bender von Haller Dragsted • Co-founder, Open Source Vendors Ass. (OSL) • Co-founder, Creative Commons DK • Co-founder, Danish Internet Society Chapter • http://suse.groenbaek.net/openlife • http://www.linkedin.com/in/vonhaller • http://www.23hq.com/mhg 2
  • Personalia • Attorney-at-law, Bender von Haller Dragsted • Co-founder, Open Source Vendors Ass. (OSL) • Co-founder, Creative Commons DK • Co-founder, Danish Internet Society Chapter • http://suse.groenbaek.net/openlife • http://www.linkedin.com/in/vonhaller • http://www.23hq.com/mhg • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=672056156 2
  • Personalia • Attorney-at-law, Bender von Haller Dragsted • Co-founder, Open Source Vendors Ass. (OSL) • Co-founder, Creative Commons DK • Co-founder, Danish Internet Society Chapter • http://suse.groenbaek.net/openlife • http://www.linkedin.com/in/vonhaller • http://www.23hq.com/mhg • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=672056156 2
  • Agenda 3
  • Agenda 3
  • Agenda • The History of FLOSS 3
  • Agenda • The History of FLOSS • Copyright and OSS 3
  • Agenda • The History of FLOSS • Copyright and OSS • Patents and OSS 3
  • Agenda • The History of FLOSS • Copyright and OSS • Patents and OSS • OSS Licenses 3
  • Agenda • The History of FLOSS • Copyright and OSS • Patents and OSS • OSS Licenses • Copyleft 3
  • Agenda • The History of FLOSS • Copyright and OSS • Patents and OSS • OSS Licenses • Copyleft • Business models 3
  • Agenda • The History of FLOSS • Copyright and OSS • Patents and OSS • OSS Licenses • Copyleft • Business models • Cases 3
  • http://vodpod.com/watch/ 46377-revolution-os-1hr-25- mins 4
  • Free Software 5
  • Free Software • Hacker culture 5
  • Free Software • Hacker culture • Richard Stallman 5
  • Free Software • Hacker culture • Richard Stallman • Free Software Foundation 5
  • Free Software • Hacker culture • Richard Stallman • Free Software Foundation • Software should be free 5
  • Free Software • Hacker culture • Richard Stallman • Free Software Foundation • Software should be free • GNU “GNU is not Unix” 5
  • Free Software • Hacker culture • Richard Stallman • Free Software Foundation • Software should be free • GNU “GNU is not Unix” • BSD and ATT 5
  • Linux and Open source 6
  • Linux and Open source • Linus Torvalds 6
  • Linux and Open source • Linus Torvalds – Linux released under the GPL v2 6
  • Linux and Open source • Linus Torvalds – Linux released under the GPL v2 • Eric Raymonds 6
  • Linux and Open source • Linus Torvalds – Linux released under the GPL v2 • Eric Raymonds – Cathedral and the Bazaar 6
  • Linux and Open source • Linus Torvalds – Linux released under the GPL v2 • Eric Raymonds – Cathedral and the Bazaar • Bruce Perens 6
  • Linux and Open source • Linus Torvalds – Linux released under the GPL v2 • Eric Raymonds – Cathedral and the Bazaar • Bruce Perens – Open Source Initiative 6
  • OSS and Microsoft 7
  • OSS and Microsoft • 2002 7
  • OSS and Microsoft • 2002 – Steve Balmer: “Copyright cancer”, “communism” 7
  • OSS and Microsoft • 2002 – Steve Balmer: “Copyright cancer”, “communism” • 2004 7
  • OSS and Microsoft • 2002 – Steve Balmer: “Copyright cancer”, “communism” • 2004 – SCO, Patent threaths, “Beware of infectious GPL” 7
  • OSS and Microsoft • 2002 – Steve Balmer: “Copyright cancer”, “communism” • 2004 – SCO, Patent threaths, “Beware of infectious GPL” • 2008 7
  • OSS and Microsoft • 2002 – Steve Balmer: “Copyright cancer”, “communism” • 2004 – SCO, Patent threaths, “Beware of infectious GPL” • 2008 – Peaceful co-existence, Novell dea 7
  • OSS Business 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape • 1999 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape • 1999 – Cygnus 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape • 1999 – Cygnus • 2000 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape • 1999 – Cygnus • 2000 – VA Linux, RedHat 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape • 1999 – Cygnus • 2000 – VA Linux, RedHat • 2005 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape • 1999 – Cygnus • 2000 – VA Linux, RedHat • 2005 – IBM, SUN 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape • 1999 – Cygnus • 2000 – VA Linux, RedHat • 2005 – IBM, SUN • 2006 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape • 1999 – Cygnus • 2000 – VA Linux, RedHat • 2005 – IBM, SUN • 2006 – Purple Scout, Redpill Linpro 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape • 1999 – Cygnus • 2000 – VA Linux, RedHat • 2005 – IBM, SUN • 2006 – Purple Scout, Redpill Linpro • 2008 8
  • OSS Business • 1998 – Netscape • 1999 – Cygnus • 2000 – VA Linux, RedHat • 2005 – IBM, SUN • 2006 – Purple Scout, Redpill Linpro • 2008 – MySQL sold to SUN, Symbian 8
  • Names 9
  • Names • Free software 9
  • Names • Free software • Open source software 9
  • Names • Free software • Open source software • Free Libre Open Source Software 9
  • Names • Free software • Open source software • Free Libre Open Source Software • Copyleft 9
  • Names • Free software • Open source software • Free Libre Open Source Software • Copyleft • Free Software Foundation 9
  • Names • Free software • Open source software • Free Libre Open Source Software • Copyleft • Free Software Foundation • Open Source Initiative 9
  • Free Software ideology 10
  • Free Software ideology • “All software should be free” 10
  • Free Software ideology • “All software should be free” • You get the four freedoms 10
  • Free Software ideology • “All software should be free” • You get the four freedoms • You shall preserve these freedoms 10
  • Free Software ideology • “All software should be free” • You get the four freedoms • You shall preserve these freedoms • So when you redistribute, copyleft secures that the next persons gets the same freedoms 10
  • Open Source principles 11
  • Open Source principles • Free redistribution 11
  • Open Source principles • Free redistribution • Source code 11
  • Open Source principles • Free redistribution • Source code • Derived work 11
  • Open Source principles • Free redistribution • Source code • Derived work • Integrity of The Author's Source Code 11
  • Open Source principles • Free redistribution • Source code • Derived work • Integrity of The Author's Source Code • 5-10: Non-discrimination 11
  • Copyright The programmer or the producer owns the ● software Property rights are limited ● Copyright is limited in time ● The user is a user not an owner ● The license is an agreement not a law ● The license grants positively defined user ● rights. All residual rights belongs to the licensor ● Without copyright no licenses ●
  • Patents 13
  • Patents • “A set of exclusive rights granted by a state to an inventor or his assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for a disclosure of an invention” 13
  • Patents • “A set of exclusive rights granted by a state to an inventor or his assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for a disclosure of an invention” • FSF: “a patent on any performance of a computer realised by means of a computer programquot; 13
  • Patents • “A set of exclusive rights granted by a state to an inventor or his assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for a disclosure of an invention” • FSF: “a patent on any performance of a computer realised by means of a computer programquot; • Licensor shall not restrict use by patents 13
  • Patents • “A set of exclusive rights granted by a state to an inventor or his assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for a disclosure of an invention” • FSF: “a patent on any performance of a computer realised by means of a computer programquot; • Licensor shall not restrict use by patents • OSS licensee shall not claim patents against licensor or sublicensee 13
  • Licenses 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 – MIT License 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 – MIT License – New BSD license 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 – MIT License – New BSD license • Copyleft, reciprocal or hereditary licences 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 – MIT License – New BSD license • Copyleft, reciprocal or hereditary licences – Weak copyleft 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 – MIT License – New BSD license • Copyleft, reciprocal or hereditary licences – Weak copyleft • Artistic license v1 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 – MIT License – New BSD license • Copyleft, reciprocal or hereditary licences – Weak copyleft • Artistic license v1 • Eclipse Public License 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 – MIT License – New BSD license • Copyleft, reciprocal or hereditary licences – Weak copyleft • Artistic license v1 • Eclipse Public License • Mozilla Public License v.1.1 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 – MIT License – New BSD license • Copyleft, reciprocal or hereditary licences – Weak copyleft • Artistic license v1 • Eclipse Public License • Mozilla Public License v.1.1 – Strong copyleft 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 – MIT License – New BSD license • Copyleft, reciprocal or hereditary licences – Weak copyleft • Artistic license v1 • Eclipse Public License • Mozilla Public License v.1.1 – Strong copyleft • GNU GPL v1 and v2 14
  • Licenses • Academic or permissive licenses – Apache License v2 – MIT License – New BSD license • Copyleft, reciprocal or hereditary licences – Weak copyleft • Artistic license v1 • Eclipse Public License • Mozilla Public License v.1.1 – Strong copyleft • GNU GPL v1 and v2 • GNU LGPL v1 and v2 14
  • Copyleft - the basics 15
  • Copyleft - the basics • You don’t have to redistribute or distribute 15
  • Copyleft - the basics • You don’t have to redistribute or distribute • (Exception: “written offer valid for any third party” in GPL, v. 2) 15
  • Copyleft - the basics • You don’t have to redistribute or distribute • (Exception: “written offer valid for any third party” in GPL, v. 2) • Comply or cease use, or call back distribution 15
  • Copyleft - the basics • You don’t have to redistribute or distribute • (Exception: “written offer valid for any third party” in GPL, v. 2) • Comply or cease use, or call back distribution • Make combined program, including modifications and otherwise closed code available under GPL (or compatible licens) 15
  • Derivative work 16
  • Derivative work • A work based on one or more pre- existing works 16
  • Derivative work • A work based on one or more pre- existing works • Improvement, translation, correction 16
  • Derivative work • A work based on one or more pre- existing works • Improvement, translation, correction • Not collective work 16
  • Derivative work • A work based on one or more pre- existing works • Improvement, translation, correction • Not collective work • Modifications are copyrighted themselves 16
  • Derivative work • A work based on one or more pre- existing works • Improvement, translation, correction • Not collective work • Modifications are copyrighted themselves • Very few court cases 16
  • Derivative work • A work based on one or more pre- existing works • Improvement, translation, correction • Not collective work • Modifications are copyrighted themselves • Very few court cases • GPL: Combinations 16
  • Combination 17
  • Combination • Combination of code into a whole 17
  • Combination • Combination of code into a whole • NB: All combinations are permitted and “private” combinations have no restrictions 17
  • Combination • Combination of code into a whole • NB: All combinations are permitted and “private” combinations have no restrictions • Mechanism of communication 17
  • Combination • Combination of code into a whole • NB: All combinations are permitted and “private” combinations have no restrictions • Mechanism of communication • Semantics of the communication 17
  • Combination • Combination of code into a whole • NB: All combinations are permitted and “private” combinations have no restrictions • Mechanism of communication • Semantics of the communication • Output not covered 17
  • Combination • Combination of code into a whole • NB: All combinations are permitted and “private” combinations have no restrictions • Mechanism of communication • Semantics of the communication • Output not covered • (Exc: GPL program copies text into output) 17
  • Combination • Combination of code into a whole • NB: All combinations are permitted and “private” combinations have no restrictions • Mechanism of communication • Semantics of the communication • Output not covered • (Exc: GPL program copies text into output) • Output of language interpreter 17
  • Combination • Combination of code into a whole • NB: All combinations are permitted and “private” combinations have no restrictions • Mechanism of communication • Semantics of the communication • Output not covered • (Exc: GPL program copies text into output) • Output of language interpreter • (Exc: “bindings” interpreter to program) 17
  • Combination • Combination of code into a whole • NB: All combinations are permitted and “private” combinations have no restrictions • Mechanism of communication • Semantics of the communication • Output not covered • (Exc: GPL program copies text into output) • Output of language interpreter • (Exc: “bindings” interpreter to program) • Library is under GPL, program is not 17
  • Combination • Combination of code into a whole • NB: All combinations are permitted and “private” combinations have no restrictions • Mechanism of communication • Semantics of the communication • Output not covered • (Exc: GPL program copies text into output) • Output of language interpreter • (Exc: “bindings” interpreter to program) • Library is under GPL, program is not • Program is under GPL, module is not 17
  • Combination cont. 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates – Exc: Javascript calls 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates – Exc: Javascript calls • Microsoft Visual C++ (or Visual Basic) DLLs 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates – Exc: Javascript calls • Microsoft Visual C++ (or Visual Basic) DLLs • Plug-ins under a GPL program 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates – Exc: Javascript calls • Microsoft Visual C++ (or Visual Basic) DLLs • Plug-ins under a GPL program – dynamically linked plug-ins 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates – Exc: Javascript calls • Microsoft Visual C++ (or Visual Basic) DLLs • Plug-ins under a GPL program – dynamically linked plug-ins – fork and exec to invoke plug-ins 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates – Exc: Javascript calls • Microsoft Visual C++ (or Visual Basic) DLLs • Plug-ins under a GPL program – dynamically linked plug-ins – fork and exec to invoke plug-ins • System library exception 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates – Exc: Javascript calls • Microsoft Visual C++ (or Visual Basic) DLLs • Plug-ins under a GPL program – dynamically linked plug-ins – fork and exec to invoke plug-ins • System library exception • Aggregate work is not combined work 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates – Exc: Javascript calls • Microsoft Visual C++ (or Visual Basic) DLLs • Plug-ins under a GPL program – dynamically linked plug-ins – fork and exec to invoke plug-ins • System library exception • Aggregate work is not combined work • Linking exception 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates – Exc: Javascript calls • Microsoft Visual C++ (or Visual Basic) DLLs • Plug-ins under a GPL program – dynamically linked plug-ins – fork and exec to invoke plug-ins • System library exception • Aggregate work is not combined work • Linking exception • LGPL allows linking to closed applications 18
  • Combination cont. • CMS Templates – Exc: Javascript calls • Microsoft Visual C++ (or Visual Basic) DLLs • Plug-ins under a GPL program – dynamically linked plug-ins – fork and exec to invoke plug-ins • System library exception • Aggregate work is not combined work • Linking exception • LGPL allows linking to closed applications – Java archive files 18
  • Distribution 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution • GPL v3: Propagation and Conveyance 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution • GPL v3: Propagation and Conveyance • In soft- and hardware 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution • GPL v3: Propagation and Conveyance • In soft- and hardware • ASP loophole og network exception 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution • GPL v3: Propagation and Conveyance • In soft- and hardware • ASP loophole og network exception • Affero Public License 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution • GPL v3: Propagation and Conveyance • In soft- and hardware • ASP loophole og network exception • Affero Public License • Contractors on/off-site 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution • GPL v3: Propagation and Conveyance • In soft- and hardware • ASP loophole og network exception • Affero Public License • Contractors on/off-site • Outsourcing 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution • GPL v3: Propagation and Conveyance • In soft- and hardware • ASP loophole og network exception • Affero Public License • Contractors on/off-site • Outsourcing • Mergers and Acquisitions 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution • GPL v3: Propagation and Conveyance • In soft- and hardware • ASP loophole og network exception • Affero Public License • Contractors on/off-site • Outsourcing • Mergers and Acquisitions • Let recipient download the GPL’ed code 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution • GPL v3: Propagation and Conveyance • In soft- and hardware • ASP loophole og network exception • Affero Public License • Contractors on/off-site • Outsourcing • Mergers and Acquisitions • Let recipient download the GPL’ed code 19
  • Distribution • GPL v2: Distribution • GPL v3: Propagation and Conveyance • In soft- and hardware • ASP loophole og network exception • Affero Public License • Contractors on/off-site • Outsourcing • Mergers and Acquisitions • Let recipient download the GPL’ed code 19
  • Escapes 20
  • Escapes • Make deal with licensor 20
  • Escapes • Make deal with licensor • Replace code 20
  • Escapes • Make deal with licensor • Replace code • Work around 20
  • Escapes • Make deal with licensor • Replace code • Work around • GPL v3, sec. 8 20
  • Escapes • Make deal with licensor • Replace code • Work around • GPL v3, sec. 8 – Termination notice 20
  • Escapes • Make deal with licensor • Replace code • Work around • GPL v3, sec. 8 – Termination notice • NDA: Developer can agree not to release changes at all 20
  • Escapes • Make deal with licensor • Replace code • Work around • GPL v3, sec. 8 – Termination notice • NDA: Developer can agree not to release changes at all • NDA: Developer can agree only to release changes to customer 20
  • Enforcement 21
  • Enforcement • The GPL is enforceable! 21
  • Enforcement • The GPL is enforceable! – Germany 2004: Netfilter/Iptables; 2006: D-Link 21
  • Enforcement • The GPL is enforceable! – Germany 2004: Netfilter/Iptables; 2006: D-Link – US 2007: BusyBox; 2008: Jacobsen vs. Katzer 21
  • Enforcement • The GPL is enforceable! – Germany 2004: Netfilter/Iptables; 2006: D-Link – US 2007: BusyBox; 2008: Jacobsen vs. Katzer – SCO 21
  • Enforcement • The GPL is enforceable! – Germany 2004: Netfilter/Iptables; 2006: D-Link – US 2007: BusyBox; 2008: Jacobsen vs. Katzer – SCO • Copyright holder 21
  • Enforcement • The GPL is enforceable! – Germany 2004: Netfilter/Iptables; 2006: D-Link – US 2007: BusyBox; 2008: Jacobsen vs. Katzer – SCO • Copyright holder • Licensee 21
  • Enforcement • The GPL is enforceable! – Germany 2004: Netfilter/Iptables; 2006: D-Link – US 2007: BusyBox; 2008: Jacobsen vs. Katzer – SCO • Copyright holder • Licensee • GPL-VIOLATIONS.ORG 21
  • Damages 22
  • Damages • Compensation under copyright 22
  • Damages • Compensation under copyright • No penal damages or stipulated damages 22
  • Damages • Compensation under copyright • No penal damages or stipulated damages • Economic loss suffered by licensor 22
  • Damages • Compensation under copyright • No penal damages or stipulated damages • Economic loss suffered by licensor • Rule of thumb: 2 x license fee 22
  • Damages • Compensation under copyright • No penal damages or stipulated damages • Economic loss suffered by licensor • Rule of thumb: 2 x license fee • Injunction 22
  • Damages • Compensation under copyright • No penal damages or stipulated damages • Economic loss suffered by licensor • Rule of thumb: 2 x license fee • Injunction • Legal fees 22
  • Business models 23
  • Business models • Dual licensing 23
  • Business models • Dual licensing – Warranties 23
  • Business models • Dual licensing – Warranties – Copyleft exemptions 23
  • Business models • Dual licensing – Warranties – Copyleft exemptions • Services 23
  • Business models • Dual licensing – Warranties – Copyleft exemptions • Services – Warranties 23
  • Business models • Dual licensing – Warranties – Copyleft exemptions • Services – Warranties – Support and maintenance 23
  • Business models • Dual licensing – Warranties – Copyleft exemptions • Services – Warranties – Support and maintenance – Consultancy 23
  • Business models • Dual licensing – Warranties – Copyleft exemptions • Services – Warranties – Support and maintenance – Consultancy – Accesories 23
  • Business models • Dual licensing – Warranties – Copyleft exemptions • Services – Warranties – Support and maintenance – Consultancy – Accesories • Marketing and distribution 23
  • Business models • Dual licensing – Warranties – Copyleft exemptions • Services – Warranties – Support and maintenance – Consultancy – Accesories • Marketing and distribution • Hardware sales 23
  • The Mindstorm story
  • The Mindstorm story
  • LEGO goes open source
  • LEGO goes open source 1 May 2006. LEGO press release Hackers, Get Ready! LEGO Group Announces Open Source Firmware, Developer Kits for LEGO® MINDSTORMS® NXT Consumer-directed robotics experience creation to enter “NXT” phase with open firmware, Software, Hardware and Bluetooth Developer Kits to launch in August
  • Background
  • Background Mindstorms robots launched in 1998 ●
  • Background Mindstorms robots launched in 1998 ● The best-selling LEGO product ever ●
  • Background Mindstorms robots launched in 1998 ● The best-selling LEGO product ever ● Huge Mindstorm community ●
  • Background Mindstorms robots launched in 1998 ● The best-selling LEGO product ever ● Huge Mindstorm community ● LEGO was and is not a software ● company
  • Background Mindstorms robots launched in 1998 ● The best-selling LEGO product ever ● Huge Mindstorm community ● LEGO was and is not a software ● company Only minor upgrades to the firmware ●
  • Background Mindstorms robots launched in 1998 ● The best-selling LEGO product ever ● Huge Mindstorm community ● LEGO was and is not a software ● company Only minor upgrades to the firmware ● Several parallel Mindstorms OS’s ●
  • Challenges
  • Challenges LEGO was not comfortable with “openess” ●
  • Challenges LEGO was not comfortable with “openess” ● LEGO has been and is extremely reliant ● on strong IPRs
  • Challenges LEGO was not comfortable with “openess” ● LEGO has been and is extremely reliant ● on strong IPRs ”You don't give away IPRs for free” ●
  • Challenges LEGO was not comfortable with “openess” ● LEGO has been and is extremely reliant ● on strong IPRs ”You don't give away IPRs for free” ● Turbulent period for LEGO in general ●
  • Challenges LEGO was not comfortable with “openess” ● LEGO has been and is extremely reliant ● on strong IPRs ”You don't give away IPRs for free” ● Turbulent period for LEGO in general ● Third party software included ●
  • Solution
  • Solution Embrace User driven innovation ●
  • Solution Embrace User driven innovation ● Open source as the enabler ●
  • Solution Embrace User driven innovation ● Open source as the enabler ● Third party permission for ● redistribution under an OS license
  • Solution Embrace User driven innovation ● Open source as the enabler ● Third party permission for ● redistribution under an OS license Choice of license ●
  • Solution Embrace User driven innovation ● Open source as the enabler ● Third party permission for ● redistribution under an OS license Choice of license ● ”Genuine” open source licence −
  • Solution Embrace User driven innovation ● Open source as the enabler ● Third party permission for ● redistribution under an OS license Choice of license ● ”Genuine” open source licence − Permissive (Academic) or Copyleft − (reciprocal license)
  • The OS license choice 29
  • The OS license choice Mozilla Public license v. 1.1 ● 29
  • The OS license choice Mozilla Public license v. 1.1 ● Weak copyleft ● 29
  • The OS license choice Mozilla Public license v. 1.1 ● Weak copyleft ● Modification is limited altering ● the files 29
  • The OS license choice Mozilla Public license v. 1.1 ● Weak copyleft ● Modification is limited altering ● the files “I did not understand GPL v.2” ● 29
  • The OS license choice Mozilla Public license v. 1.1 ● Weak copyleft ● Modification is limited altering ● the files “I did not understand GPL v.2” ● LEGO was only concerned with ● modifications of the actual files 29
  • The “beauty” of the solution! 30
  • The “beauty” of the solution! • Huge press coverage and goodwill 30
  • The “beauty” of the solution! • Huge press coverage and goodwill • Large number of downloads of code 30
  • The “beauty” of the solution! • Huge press coverage and goodwill • Large number of downloads of code • Much more “intelligence” in the bricks 30
  • The “beauty” of the solution! • Huge press coverage and goodwill • Large number of downloads of code • Much more “intelligence” in the bricks • Convincing strategy towards competitors 30
  • The “beauty” of the solution! • Huge press coverage and goodwill • Large number of downloads of code • Much more “intelligence” in the bricks • Convincing strategy towards competitors • Option to “close” the code again 30
  • The “beauty” of the solution! • Huge press coverage and goodwill • Large number of downloads of code • Much more “intelligence” in the bricks • Convincing strategy towards competitors • Option to “close” the code again • Many more bricks sold! 30
  • CASE: MySQL Dual-licensing 31
  • CASE: MySQL Dual-licensing • The software company perspective 31
  • CASE: MySQL Dual-licensing • The software company perspective • The same code is licensed under two different licences: 31
  • CASE: MySQL Dual-licensing • The software company perspective • The same code is licensed under two different licences: – MySQL Community Server: GPL v. 2 with FOSS exception 31
  • CASE: MySQL Dual-licensing • The software company perspective • The same code is licensed under two different licences: – MySQL Community Server: GPL v. 2 with FOSS exception – MySQL Enterprise: Commercial license 31
  • Owner's prerogative
  • Owner's prerogative The owner can decide to release under ● any and as many terms she likes
  • Owner's prerogative The owner can decide to release under ● any and as many terms she likes Dual licensing is only possible for ● owner's own modfications
  • Owner's prerogative The owner can decide to release under ● any and as many terms she likes Dual licensing is only possible for ● owner's own modfications Or assigned modifications ●
  • Owner's prerogative The owner can decide to release under ● any and as many terms she likes Dual licensing is only possible for ● owner's own modfications Or assigned modifications ● Control is necessary to mitigate liability ●
  • Owner's prerogative The owner can decide to release under ● any and as many terms she likes Dual licensing is only possible for ● owner's own modfications Or assigned modifications ● Control is necessary to mitigate liability ● ”Closing in” the code again ●
  • Copyright and control 33
  • Copyright and control • MySQL has exclusive copyright to the code 33
  • Copyright and control • MySQL has exclusive copyright to the code • MySQL controls and certifies the code 33
  • Copyright and control • MySQL has exclusive copyright to the code • MySQL controls and certifies the code • The GPL does not give any rights to use MySQLs trademarks 33
  • Why pay? 34
  • Why pay? • Certification of the code 34
  • Why pay? • Certification of the code • Warranties 34
  • Why pay? • Certification of the code • Warranties • Maintenance and support 34
  • Why pay? • Certification of the code • Warranties • Maintenance and support • Copyleft exemption 34
  • Still not convinced? 35
  • Still not convinced? • MySQL AB was in 2008 bought by Sun Microsystem, Inc. for approximately USD $1 billion in total consideration 35
  • CASE: NITA 36
  • CASE: NITA • Danish National IT and Telecom Agency 36
  • CASE: NITA • Danish National IT and Telecom Agency • eFaktura (eInvoice) 36
  • CASE: NITA • Danish National IT and Telecom Agency • eFaktura (eInvoice) • Electronic invoices to, from and between public agencies 36
  • CASE: NITA • Danish National IT and Telecom Agency • eFaktura (eInvoice) • Electronic invoices to, from and between public agencies • Core service: UDDI registry for webservice to identify senders and receivers 36
  • Challenges 37
  • Challenges • Two applications provided by NITA to user (e.g. ERP vendors) 37
  • Challenges • Two applications provided by NITA to user (e.g. ERP vendors) • API between users’ ERPs and UDDI WS 37
  • Challenges • Two applications provided by NITA to user (e.g. ERP vendors) • API between users’ ERPs and UDDI WS • Reference implementation integrating API with ERP 37
  • Challenges • Two applications provided by NITA to user (e.g. ERP vendors) • API between users’ ERPs and UDDI WS • Reference implementation integrating API with ERP • NITA wanted to release the application under an OS license 37
  • Goals 38
  • Goals • Satisfying the politicians 38
  • Goals • Satisfying the politicians • Wide adoption of UDDI 38
  • Goals • Satisfying the politicians • Wide adoption of UDDI • Community based improvement of the API 38
  • Goals • Satisfying the politicians • Wide adoption of UDDI • Community based improvement of the API • Many vendors should integrate API into their ERP 38
  • Solutions 39
  • Solutions • API 39
  • Solutions • API – Copyleft 39
  • Solutions • API – Copyleft – Mozilla public license v. 1.1 (maybe EUPL v. 1.1) 39
  • Solutions • API – Copyleft – Mozilla public license v. 1.1 (maybe EUPL v. 1.1) • Reference implementation 39
  • Solutions • API – Copyleft – Mozilla public license v. 1.1 (maybe EUPL v. 1.1) • Reference implementation – Permissive licence 39
  • Solutions • API – Copyleft – Mozilla public license v. 1.1 (maybe EUPL v. 1.1) • Reference implementation – Permissive licence – FreeBSD license 39