Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Open-Source GPL Rewrite on Fast Track?

Filed under
OSS

Seeking to relieve patent licensing worries by the open-source community, industry heavyweights here at the Linuxworld Summit conference said a revised version of the GPL (General Public License) could arrive sooner than many had expected.

At a LinuxWorld panel, Eben Moglen, the legal counsel for the Free Software Foundation, said that the first public draft of the GNU General Public License 3 will be available for comment shortly. "It won't be long before the first public draft of the GPL 3 will be out and it will include clauses on how to conduct patent defense," he said.

he GPL is the most widely-used, free software license. Moglen estimated that 65 to 70 percent of all open-source projects were licensed under the GPL, which had its last major update in 1991. Since then, change in the software industry-such as the rise of the importance of software patent issues and questions about how the GPL handles derivate works-has made an update necessary.

Part of the push behind a revised GPL, many Linuxworld attendees suggested, is not to create simply another license, but to create a better GPL that can garner popular support and solve the most glaring problems found with the current version.

The GPL's language must be cleaned up, according to Daniel Egger, chairman of Open Source Risk Management, which offers open-source risk management products, services and insurance.

However, the hot-button issue with the GPL for Linuxworld attendees concerned patents.

Steven Henry, an IP (intellectual property) attorney with the Boston-based IP specialist law firm, Wolf Greenfield & Sachs PC, said that dealing with patent issues will be critical for the new GPL.

Patent and the "proprietary rights [that go with them] are the elephant in the room," Henry said. "Proprietary right issues must be dealt with if open source is to survive."

Full Story.

More in Tux Machines

Black Hat 2014: Open Source Could Solve Medical Device Security

On the topic of source code liability, Greer suggests that eventually software developers, including medical device development companies, will be responsible for the trouble their software causes (or fails to prevent). I think it’s fair to say that it is impossible to guarantee a totally secure system. You cannot prove a negative statement after all. Given enough time, most systems can be breached. So where does this potential liability end? What if my company has sloppy coding standards, no code reviews, or I use a third-party software library that has a vulnerability? Should hacking be considered foreseeable misuse? Read more

Does government finally grok open source?

Yes, the government -- one U.S. federal government employee told me that government IT tends to be "stove-piped," with people "even working within the same building" not having much of a clue what their peers are doing, which is not exactly the open source way. That's changing. One way to see this shift is in government policies. For the U.S. federal government, there is now a "default to open," a dramatic reversal on long-standing practices of spending heavily with a core of proprietary technology vendors. Read more

The OS LinuX Desktop

Reader Oliver wanted to make his Linux Mint desktop look as much like a Mac as possible so others would find it easy to use. Given some of our previous Linux featured desktops, we know it wasn't tough, but the end-result still looks great. Here's how it's all set up. Read more

A Linux Desktop Designed for You

Desktop environments for Linux are not released ready-made. Behind each is a set of assumptions about what a desktop should be, and how users should interact with them. Increasingly, too, each environment has a history -- some of which are many years old. As you shop around for a desktop, these assumptions are worth taking note of. Often, they can reveal tendencies that you might not discover without several days of probing and working with the desktop. Read more