Thinking about the Open Service problem
As Havoc mentioned, I’m putting in some time on thinking about what an Open Service Definition (to parallel the Open Source and Free Software Definitions). I present here a rough draft of a framework for evaluating such a definition. It is not the definition itself, nor a license/technology/business model/etc. which [...]
Category Archives: licensing
four quick notes on Havoc’s keynote
18-Jul-07Four quick notes on Havoc’s GUADEC keynote:
I did the right thing by not going to GUADEC, but man, I wish I were at GUADEC.
Havoc (and others saying the same thing) are completely right that we must move towards deep web integration. I have no strong opinion on whether online-desktop is the right technological approach for [...]
quick pondering on artificial scarcity
03-Jul-07This deserves to be developed more fully, but perhaps the thread that ties together my irritation with the MS-Novell deal, my irritation with the Mozilla TM licensing, and what worries me about the push against copylefted DB data, is the creation of (or in the DB case, allows the creation of) artificial scarcity. I’m OK [...]
GPL v3, the Q&A: part 4- odds and ends
28-Jun-07These are the last odds and ends of my GPL Q&A series. I may or may not find the energy to elaborate on the patent and DRM provisions tomorrow, since those seem to have generated the most questions, but I may not- I’m completely destroyed right now, and I plan on going to a baseball [...]
GPL v3, the Q&A: part 3- companies
28-Jun-07(Before going further, you should (at the minimum) read the disclaimer on Monday’s post and (ideally) make sure you’ve read all of the past two posts. (first, second.))
Q: Companies hate this! The sky is falling if the GPL is adopted!
A: Find your calm place. There is no doubt that the new license will create new [...]
GPL v3, the Q&A: part 2- developers
26-Jun-07(This is part two of a series. Before going further, you should (at the minimum) read the disclaimer on yesterday’s post and (ideally) make sure you’ve read all of yesterday’s post.)
Q: Has there ever been a sequel that wasn’t terrible?
A: Godfather II and Star Wars II. (I refuse to call it V.) I’m no Coppola, [...]
GPL v3, the Q&A: part 1- the license
26-Jun-07Q: So why are we here?
A: At the end of this week, after 16 years, the Free Software Foundation should bless version three of the GNU General Public License, the sequel to what is arguably the most widely used and most impactful copyright license ever.1 Quite literally everyone who makes software - open, proprietary, or [...]
For those interested in the question of whether or not the General Public License is a license or a contract, and how enforceable it is, I was pointed earlier today at this very nice little paper1 by Duke Law prof Sapna Kumar. Also gives a fairly good background on the license, what it does, and [...]
rosen commentary on gpl v3
03-Jun-07With the final draft of gpl v3 having been announced, commentary will inevitably trickle out. The first I’ve seen worth noting is from Larry Rosen.
He hits on most of the important improvements: more explicit and comprehensive language (perhaps in places at the expense of clarity for hackers, unfortunately); compatibility with the APL; and more clarity [...]
It is incredible how so few people can get so many things wrong in so few emails, especially when there are actually people saying the right thing right there in the thread.
(for those whose instinctive response is ‘well duh, it is debian-legal’, I unsubscribed… jeez, most of a decade ago now, and may have [...]