Understanding The Complexity of Copyleft Defense:

After 25 Years of GPL Enforcement, Is Copyleft Succeeding?


Bradley M. Kuhn

LibrePlanet 2017

Sunday 26 March 2017

Follow along with the slides: ebb.org/lp2017/

Anything in blue is hyperlink; feel free to read along.

Why Talk About Copyleft?

So…Conservancy has many activities…very few of which are licensing work…

…but people love hearing about copyleft most of all.

And, you (Free Software developers) deserve to know the whole story.

What Can I Say About Copyleft?

Since I work for a charity, not a company or a trade association…

I have the freedom (and in some sense the obligation) to give you the whole story from my point of view.

Conservancy operates more transparently than any org, company or trade association in our community.

Philosophical First Principles

Begin always with first principles…

An Interdisciplinary Consideration

I got kicked out of university after delivering a brilliant lecture on the aggressive influence of German philosophy on rock and roll entitled “You, Kant, Always Get What You Want”.

— John Cameron Mitchell

Individual First Principles

The brief tale of “why I decided to stand up for the value of copyleft”…

The Liberal Arts

I believed in the power of interdisciplinary approach. I studied Computer Science. But at a liberal arts university.

The Campus Luggable

My 1992 laptop (from Sager) looked very much like this …

Yes, We Really Lived Like This

I went to a bookstore. I bought this magazine. I found the laptop and called them on the phone to order.

Finding an operating system?

Our Hobbyist Culture

I read this in real time…

I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional …)

— Linus Torvalds, Sunday 25 August 1991, comp.os.minix

…er, well, on Usenet, real time was “a few days”.

Our Hobbyist Culture

I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional …)

— Linus Torvalds, Sunday 25 August 1991, comp.os.minix

Hobbyists: People Who Read This

Hobbyists: People Who Bought This

& I had all source code of installed software, and ability to recompile my patches and test them. & I did.

Copyleft's First Principle

Copyleft is a strategy of utilizing copyright law to pursue the policy goal of fostering & encouraging the equal & inalienable right to copy, share, modify & improve creative works of authorship. Copyleft … describes any method that utilizes the copyright system to achieve the aforementioned goal. Copyleft as a concept is usually implemented in the details of a specific copyright license … Copyright holders of creative work can unilaterally implement these licenses for their own works to build communities that collaboratively share & improve those copylefted creative works.

— Definition of copyleft from copyleft.org

Software Freedom As Actual First Principle

The right for users to copy, share, modify — and otherwise improve and make effective use of those improvements — should not be infringed.

Copyleft is a strategy to help us achieve that first principle.

So, Is It Working?

We could, and should, consider:

Does copyleft work at all?

Inspect Every Free Software Quantum Reality?

Maybe we could run a parallel universe experiment where all Free Software is under non-copyleft licenses, and another where all are copylefted?

Inspect Every Free Software Quantum Reality?

Even if the many worlds interpretation is correct, we'd change the outcome by observing it anyway.

So, we must analyze the world we have… but we must question the truthiness and revisionist history.

Should Enforcement Ever Happen?

When asked by David Woodhouse: If you are happy with the status quo, and do not want violators to be brought into compliance …

Greg K. H. answered: I do, but I don't ever think that suing them is the right way to do it, given that we have been very successful so far without having to do that.

From: <20160824174724.GE30853@kroah.com> on ksummit-discuss

Which Quantum Reality Is This, BTW?

But, our community did often enforce the GPL.

& it's been necessary for Linux's success since the advent of the embedded system.

We've Long Benefited from Copyleft Enforcement

In spring 2003, I helped the first coalition of copyright holders, including Erik Andersen of BusyBox, Harald Welte of Linux, enforce the GPL against Cisco/Linksys.

Enforcement Spawns Communities

SVN check-in r1 of the OpenWrt project was the actual source code from the coalition's GPL compliance efforts.

Admittedly, from a Linux, BusyBox, or Samba developer, most of this source code didn't go upstream.

GPL Is Not Primarily About Upstream

[Those who enforce the GPL] NEVER found any actual useful code that should have gone upstream

— Rob Landley, former BusyBox developer

GPL Is Not Primarily About Upstream

Rob and I spoke at LCA two months ago. We cleared up this misunderstanding.

Upstreamed code is only a secondary effect of copyleft's primary goal: rights to downstream users so they can someday become upstream developers.

Users Deserve The Means of Source Production

complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable.

— GPLv2§3

Garrett: It's About Downstream Users Who Become Developers


[D]o you want 4 more enterprise clustering filesystems, or another complete rewrite of the page allocator for a 3% performance improvement under a specific database workload, or do you want a bunch of teenagers who grow up hacking this stuff because it's what powers every device they own? Because honestly I think it's the latter that's helped get you [Linux developers] where you are now, and they're not going to be there if the thing that matters to you most is making sure that large companies don't feel threatened rather than making sure that the next 19 year old in a dorm room can actually hack the code on their phone and build something better as a result. It's what brought me here in the first place, and I'm hardly the only one.

— Matthew Garrett, Linux Developer, 26 August 2016
Admittedly, that 19 year old hobbyist won't have what I had at 19:

But they will have this:

& this:

& this:

& this:

Lawsuit Was Needed to Liberate TV Firmware Hacking

The base of this project was the source code released from Conservancy's BusyBox lawsuit against Samsung.

Of Course, Long Ago, It Was Fewer Markets

Harald Welte from 2004–2013 brought more than 15 GPL enforcement actions (most of which were lawsuits) and mostly against wireless router makers:

Of Course, Long Ago, It Was Fewer Markets

A mere sample of Harald's many enforcement actions (most of which were lawsuits):

  • 2004: Allnet
  • 2004: Asus
  • 2004: SecurePoint
  • 2004: Sitecom
  • 2004: Gigabyte
  • 2004: TomTom
  • 2005: ARP Datacon
  • 2005: Edimax
  • 2005: CeBit
  • 2005: Fortinet
  • 2005: MEDION
  • 2005: Targa
  • 2006: D-Link
  • 2007: Iliad
  • 2011: AVM

Our History is Enforcement

I argue: Linux and other GPL'd software has been successful because enforcement and lawsuits have happened regularly since 2002.

We can't run a parallel experiment w/out time travel or access to the quantum “many worlds”.

But, we can show it's political FUD to argue that GPL enforcement and occasional lawsuits is a new-fangled strategy that endangers Linux.

Because, if so, Linux has been “endangered” since 2002.

Meanwhile…

Compliance has become even more rare, and more devices have GPL'd software than ever.

Not just BusyBox and Linux, but Samba, ffmpeg, and many other projects.

This is not just about Linux, but Linux is the kernel of GPL activity because of the obvious: it's the GPL'd kernel.

Harald Has Moved On

Harald is no longer enforcing for Linux, due to time demands from his other projects.

Conservancy is the only org left doing community-oriented GPL enforcement for Linux.

What do I mean by “community-oriented”?

The Principles of Community-Oriented GPL Enforcement

  • Our primary goal in GPL enforcement is to bring about GPL compliance.
  • Legal action is a last resort. Compliance actions are primarily education and assistance processes to aid those who are not following the license.
  • Confidentiality can increase receptiveness and responsiveness.
  • Community-oriented enforcement must never prioritize financial gain.
  • Community-oriented compliance work does not request nor accept payment to overlook problems.
  • Community-oriented compliance work starts with carefully verifying violations and finishes only after a comprehensive analysis.
  • Community-oriented compliance processes should extend the benefit of GPLv3-like termination, even for GPLv2-only works.

Full text at sfconservancy.org/linux-compliance/principles.html.

The .01% We Don't Agree On

Greg KH and I agree on 99.99% of GPL enforcement strategy.

We differ only on one minor point.

Linux Foundation's Priority Is Not Software Freedom

I disagree with Greg KH's employer, a for-profit-company-controlled trade association called the Linux Foundation, on a lot more…

…because they prioritize so much above software freedom.

Jobs ≫ Software Freedom?

Karen Copenhaver, Legal Counsel of Linux Foundation, said to me at a LinuxCon 2013:

if allowing proprietary Linux modules creates more Linux jobs, that to me is an acceptable outcome.

Lawsuits

Companies sue each other all time: there are hundreds of lawsuits between tech companies every year.

We can't even overcount to get 50 lawsuits filed by community actors against GPL violators in history.

Yet, we remain under constant political attack because Conservancy has funded exactly one Linux lawsuit: Christoph Hellwig's ongoing case against VMware.

The Politics

Our politics should be transparent.

For a transparent discussion of some of the copyleft politics of the last year, check out time index 935 of Neil McGovern's DebConf 2016 talk.

Copyleft is not magic pixie dust.

Yes, We Think Enforcement's More Work Than It Should Be

Karen and I don't actually like GPL enforcement:

  • It's boring.
  • It's politically dangerous for our careers and our organization.
  • Speaking for just me, I'd actually rather be a developer.

I Wish It Worked This Way

In my pre-FOSDEM interview, the conference organizers asked:
it's fair to say that most FLOSS developers don't follow the debates about copyleft licenses and their enforcement, they merely want their code to remain forever free.

I answered:

ABSOLUTELY! … but …

If You Like This Approach, You Can Donate

I hate asking individuals to fund Conservancy's GPL compliance work…

… but the alternative yields corruption (& we've seen it).

So, if you want Conservancy to not give up on Linux compliance efforts, I do have to ask that you donate.

Just so we're clear: This Is What We Care About

LF accusation: Conservancy cares more about copyleft than Linux.

The FUD implication: we want to “sacrifice Linux at the holy altar of the GPL.”

Linux is a bunch of code and copyrights that happen to be GPL'd; the GPL is just a tool design.

Code and licenses are ephemeral. We care about is users' long-term freedom.

New developers should hack their devices & join our community.

The Future of Copyleft Is Yours

Conservancy acts on behalf of copyright holders who ask… but there are fewer of you left that actually want Linux to be GPL'd.

The future belongs to copyleft developers, assuming you can hold on to it…

For-Profit companies & their Trade Associations May Decide the Future Of Linux licensing

Individual Developers Should Decide How GPL works For Their Users

Linus Torvalds hates copyright assignment: every contribute keeps own copyrights.

Conservancy agrees.

Developers with copyrights ask us to act: that's a mandate.

Will that mandate get bigger or smaller?

Our coalitions insist we fight for them in the political battleground (which was created by those who oppose GPL).

‘Baffled” Is a Sane Reaction To This

Conservancy hosts compliance feedbacks session that bring overwhelming positive response, yet…

those who oppose enforcement reach new heights of criticism monthly.

Why? I dunno. My guess: they fear that developers will realize that the code should belong to developers, not to companies, and will demand control again.

So, Take It Back

So, I encourage you to wake up, demand your copyrights back, and use the licensing strategy you think is best for long-term software freedom.

If we're going to succeed, it will depend on this.

More Info / Talk License

URLs / Social Networking / Email:

Presentation and slides are: Copyright © 2015, 2016 Bradley M. Kuhn, and are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International License.