decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


To read comments to this article, go here
New GPL References Page
Monday, January 31 2005 @ 07:00 AM EST

Joe Barr has written beautifully about why he loves the GPL. If I was allowed, I'd put it in its entirety on Groklaw, but do go and read it, if you haven't already. Here is my favorite part:

The GPL covers a whole lot more than just the Linux kernel. Check the statistics. Freshmeat.net lists almost 36,000 projects covered by more than 50 different licenses. The page showing percentage covered by specific license reveals over 68% of those projects are licensed by the GPL. What's in second place? The GPL's sibling license, the GNU Lesser GPL, with nearly a 6% share. Coming in third, with 3.57%, is the original BSD license. The GPL is not just the most popular open source or free software license, it is overwhelmingly the people's choice. . . .

But Linux is immune to most of the kneecap-busting, air-supply cutting, baby-knifing techniques that Microsoft is so fond of. Linux is not a company or an individual that can be bought. . . .

And because Linux and other free software exists, I have been able to free myself from the noxious terms and conditions imposed by the monopoly on their customers. Changing their licensing terms on the fly, for example. And doing so in ways which forces meek compliance, since failure to accept them means you don't get the latest service pack, which contains fixes for dozens of gaping security holes, which are known and constantly probed for every minute of every day.

The monopoly hates the escape route the GPL provides me. That's why they constantly attack it. Those attacks will undoubtably continue. Some will be legal challenges, some will merely be insane. Sometimes the hand of Microsoft will be obvious -- as in its financial backing and support of SCO -- sometimes not. But it doesn't matter. The GPL is winning. And for that I love it all the more.

The people's choice. That's the part Sun forgot.

And it's true about forced upgrades. I have a PowerBook with Mac OSX. I love it because I can work in bed and I can take it anywhere and stay in touch with Groklaw, and it's easy and reliable. Everything just works. But I tried to buy some music the other day from iTunes, and it won't let me unless I upgrade first. Why? No reason given, but I can guess. They would like to control my activities more tightly to make sure I am not a thief? Well, as it happens, I'm not, and I take umbrage at the suggestion, so they lost a sale. Probably future sales too. I'm unlikely to buy from iTunes again, for starters. I love my PowerBook, but not as much today as I did yesterday. That's what happens when BSD code is used as a base and a company does its proprietary thing on top of it. If the only language companies understand is money, I will speak to them in their language.

That never happens in GNU/Linux software. It never forces you to do anything. You tell it what you want *it* to do, not the other way around. Proprietary software tells the customer over and over and in every way, "I don't like or trust you."

Mutual, I'm sure.

Another reason I love the GPL to add to Barr's list: you never have to analyze the license to figure out if a corporation can use the GPL to rape and pillage your neighborhood, as we are currently analyzing the allegedly opening up of Microsoft's MS XML patent license. The GPL was written to make sure corporations can't rape and pillage, even when they are overpowered by their urges, as SCO is now discovering. In short, it's a license that gives a thought about the end user, not just the vendors and the developers, and it does it by ensuring the freedom of the code, not the freedom of the programmers. That last sentence is for all the BSD guys who thought it necessary to explain the superiority of the BSD license to us one more time in some comments interspersed with the nasty Microsoft shills and "fans". 3.57% guys. That is your answer. That and my iTunes experience. End users do care about proprietary control-the-customer tricks. I am an end user, and I care. I see the advantage to me of using GPL software over any other license.

So I got inspired by Barr's article and, to be perfectly frank, by sheer annoyance at reading some of the comments that ensued. The astroturfing and general ickiness of some of the hostile comments is ... well, disgusting. But the article is beautiful. I thought about parodying Microsoft supporters' comments, but they are so extremist and over-the-top, what could I do to top the unintended humor of this master at work?:

You are a moron (Score:0)

By Anonymous Reader

You are a moron yes its true, the GPL sucks just like you. Is it the license, no its the case of people cheering for the little dog. [redacted swearing] people, this is software not a religon. I have now peged You people like I do the Mac zealots. Idiots who just want something to cheer because they have nothing else in there measley life that holds any meaning. The ones who need a cause to believe in so bad they will waste their time demonizing someone else to get ahead and writing idiotic articles like this. I use Windows Servers and Clients I love em, and if Microsoft was to stop making products tomorrow, I wouldnt even consider using linux."

As you can see, I loosened Groklaw's standards just this once, so you could feel the full flavor of the man's genius. Le mot juste, as Stendahl put it. And since I have nothing else in my "measley" [sic] life and he or she has me "peged"[sic] and am obviously seeking a "religious" outlet, I decided to do a Groklaw permanent page on the GPL, where anyone can come to find antiFUD on that topic. There is a permanent link now on the left of the page. I've collected all the articles Groklaw has done, organized them into categories, and here is my draft. Please feel free to organize it in a more fine-tuned way or to add more information in comments here, and I'll add them to the permanent page.

If someone has the time to look at each article and index what is found there, for a brief paragraph describing the contents, that would probably help us to organize it better. Or we could have an Index for the page. Be as creative as you please and improve it, if you see a way, logically, informationally, or visually. We need some way to quickly find answers so we will be up to the Herculean task of matching wits with our worthy anti-GPL scholarly opponents.

********************************

GPL References

External Resources:

The GNU General Public License

Frequently Asked Questions About the GNU GPL

Make Your Open Source Software GPL-Compatible. Or Else.

The GNU GPL and the American Way

GPL with Preamble

Linux Online Interview with PJ, including why the switch to GNU/Linux

Groklaw articles on the GPL:

The Sustainable GPL

Businessweek to Linux: Dump the GPL So Business Can Embrace and Extend It

GPL Freedom Has Limits - Golem.de Interview with Netfilter's Harald Welte

Some Advice & a New Book by Larry Rosen, and an Open Source, Open Standards Conference

IBM Files For Partial Summary Judgment on 8th Counterclaim (Copyright Infringement)

The German GPL Order - Translated

Court Confirms GPL Valid in Germany

Some Sophisticated Legal Sophistry, Otherwise Known as FUD

Computer Associates: On the Road to Damascus? Or to the Bank? Both?

Novell Releases Evolution's Connector for MS Exchange Server under GPL

U. of Toronto's Open Source and Free Software Conference - ePresence Video

Stallman and Gosling on Java and the GPL

Why Folks Do What They Do

Robin Bloor Grokking the GPL

Open Source Software: What Is It and How Does It Work?" - By Dr. Ben Kremer

Does the GPL Take Away Your "IP" Rights?

Business is Business and Credit Where Credit is Due

Fyodor Terminates SCO's Right to Distribute Nmap

Eben Moglen's Harvard Speech - The Transcript

Eben Moglen Answers Darl at Harvard - Webcast Available Now

Darl McBride's Harvard Appearance - Transcript

New FUD: Open Source Is "Economically Dangerous"

Shared Source: Microsoft's Version of Sharing

Understanding Open Source Software - by Red Hat's Mark Webbink, Esq.

Red Hat Makes Money With the GPL. How Could That Happen?

The GPL is a License, Not a Contract, Which is Why the Sky Isn't Falling

Progress Is Not Proprietary

Moglen: SCO Is Guilty of What the RIAA Calls Stealing

Ballmer Says Commercial Software is Better Because Someone's Rear End is on the Line

Why Microsoft's FUD May Be Doomed

Stallman vs. LeBlanc: Freedom or Pure Technology?

OSDL Q&A by IP Attorney Lawrence Rosen

An Open Letter to Darl McBride

SCO Legal References to GPL:

The GPL Pickle SCO Is In -- IBM's Memo in Support of PSJ on Counterclaim for Copyright Infringement

SCO Drops Its Claim That the GPL is Unconstitutional - SCO's ANSWER TO IBM'S SECOND AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS

SCO Explains GPL Strategy and SCO Director Bails Out

"SCO: Without Fear and Without Research" by Eben Moglen

Copyright Preemption -- Explaining the "GPL is Unconstitutional" Claim

Lawyers Everywhere Say Huh? Rubbish. Weird. A Stretch

IP Atty Says SCO Wants Judge to Rule GPL = Public Domain

SCO Clarifies, FSF Counters, and Groklaw Howls with Laughter

SCO Declares Total War on the GPL -- Says GPL Is Not Enforceable

SCO Tries to Use Lineo Case Against Open Source

Lineo Had a Tool to Search for GPL Code -- Why Didn't It Use It?

Yarro Admits Lineo Infringed GPL Code --DiDio: "All Roads Lead to Canopy"

SCO Still Distributing Linux From Its Web Site

SCO Explains a Bit About the GPL

SCO Scuttles Sense, Claiming GPL Invalidity

SCO Says It Will Argue Copyright Preempts GPL

SCO, Meet the GPL -- IBM's Legal Cavalry Charges

SCO's Impossible Dream

It's Free as in Freedom, Stupid

Somebody Doesn't Grok the GPL

Moglen Confirms GPL Boomerang For SCO

Caldera and SCO Contributions to Linux Under the GPL:

Tigran Aivazian Says His SMP Contributions to Linux Kernel While at SCO Were Approved by his Boss

Cross Your Heart and Hope to Die, SCO?

UPDATE to Cross Your Heart and Hope to Die, SCO?

A Stroll Down Memory Lane with OldSCO

Old SCO Also Donated Code to Linux

Caldera's Linux Contributions Were Official, not by Rogue Employees

Caldera Employee Was Key Linux Kernel Contributor

Now They Are Starting to Look at the GPL?

SenderID stories:

The FTC Summit on Email Authentication and more on Patents

For Now, Sender ID is Dead and MARID Shuts Down

Sender ID Dead for Now and SUN-MS Agreement RE Open Office

Is Sender ID Dead in the Water? - No MARID Working Group Consensus

FTC Email Authentication Summit and Sender ID

AT&T Kicks Linux's Tires, Gates on the Future, Sender ID, and a Red Hat Filing

Larry Rosen, the FTC, Open Standards, and Why FOSS Matters

More on Sender ID - A Little Water Under That Bridge? and MS-EU Hearing Report

Sender ID and Almost-Open Standards


  View Printable Version


Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )