Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Software Freedom Conservancy
201 followers -
Conservancy defends and upholds your software freedom!
Conservancy defends and upholds your software freedom!

201 followers
About
Posts

Post has attachment
Add a comment...

Post has attachment

Conservancy's Executive Director Delivers Keynote Address at Swatantra '17

Karen Sandler, Chief Guest of Swatantra Conference in India, Lauded in the Press

December 22, 2017

This week, Karen Sandler keynoted at Swatantra '17, a conference in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala organized by the International Centre for Free and Open Source Software (ICFOSS), an autonomous organization set up by Kerala's government.

Karen told the large crowd about her own experience that led her to become a strong advocate for software freedom. Specifically, in 2006, Karen needed a heart defibrillator implanted. In a subsequent research project, Karen learned disturbing facts regarding the safety of the proprietary software in medical devices, which she presented in her keynote. Karen further spoke about her ongoing experiences as both a patient living with implanted proprietary software and an expert in this field, and also discussed the future of ethics in technology and its impact on society.

Other presenters echoed Karen's message later in the conference, including IT Secretary M. Sivasankar during his official remarks. The Times of India highlighted Karen's presentation in print and online editions, calling her a large-hearted queen of free software, and The Hindu featured her talk in two articles.

Later in the conference, Karen participated in a panel on learning from the past to improve future advocacy for software freedom. She also had the opportunity to discuss challenges related to diversity in technology at the event and with local govenment officials. Karen promoted Conservancy's Outreachy program and met with a number of attendees who were a part of a women's hacker group to brainstorm future solutions in this area.

Karen and Conservancy thank the organizers of this excellent event for the opportunity to meet and speak with the enthusiastic and dedicated software freedom advocates and contributors in Kerala.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Why GPL Compliance Tutorials Should Be Free as in Freedom

a blog post by Bradley M. Kuhn

I am honored to be a co-author and editor-in-chief of the most comprehensive, detailed, and complete guide on matters related to compliance of copyleft software licenses such as the GPL. This book, Copyleft and the GNU General Public License: A Comprehensive Tutorial and Guide (which we often call the Copyleft Guide for short) is 155 pages filled with useful material to help everyone understand copyleft licenses for software, how they works, and how to comply with them properly. It is the only document to fully incorporate esoteric material such as the FSF's famous GPLv3 rationale documents directly alongside practical advice, such as the pristine example, which is the only freely published compliance analysis of a real product on the market. The document explains in great detail how that product manufacturer made good choices to comply with the GPL. The reader learns by both real-world example as well as abstract explanation.

However, the most important fact about the Copyleft Guide is not its useful and engaging content. More importantly, the license of this book gives freedom to its readers in the same way the license of the copylefted software does. Specifically, we chose the +Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 4.0 license (CC BY-SA) for this work. We believe that not just software, but any generally useful technical information that teaches people should be freely sharable and modifiable by the general public.

The reasons these freedoms are necessary seem so obvious that I'm surprised I need to state them. Companies who want to build internal training courses on copyleft compliance for their employees need to modify the materials for that purpose. They then need to be able to freely distribute them to employees and contractors for maximum effect. Furthermore, like all documents and software alike, there are always “bugs”, which (in the case of written prose) usually means there are sections that are fail to communicate to maximum effect. Those who find better ways to express the ideas need the ability to propose patches and write improvements. Perhaps most importantly, everyone who teaches should avoid NIH syndrome. Education and science work best when we borrow and share (with proper license-compliant attribution, of course!) the best material that others develop, and augment our works by incorporating them.

These reasons are akin to those that led Richard M. Stallman to write his seminal essay, Why Software Should Be Free. Indeed, if you reread that essay now — as I just did — you'll see that much of damage and many of the same problems to the advancement of software that RMS documents in that essay also occur in the world of tutorial documentation about FLOSS licensing. As too often happens in the Open Source community, though, folks seek ways to proprietarize, for profit, any copyrighted work that doesn't already have a copyleft license attached. In the field of copyleft compliance education, we see the same behavior: organizations who wish to control the dialogue and profit from selling compliance education seek to proprietarize the meta-material of compliance education, rather than sharing freely like the software itself. This yields an ironic exploitation, since the copyleft license documented therein exists as a strategy to assure the freedom to share knowledge. These educators tell their audiences with a straight face: "Sure, the software is free as in freedom, but if you want to learn how its license works, you have to license our proprietary materials!" This behavior uses legal controls to curtail the sharing of knowledge, limits the advancement and improvement of those tutorials, and emboldens silos of know-how that only wealthy corporations have the resources to access and afford. The educational dystopia that these organizations create is precisely what I sought to prevent by advocating for software freedom for so long.

While Conservancy's primary job provides non-profit infrastructure for Free Software projects, we also do a bit of license compliance work as well. But we practice what we preach: we release all the educational materials that we produce as part of the Copyleft Guide project under CC BY-SA. Other Open Source organizations are currently hypocrites on this point; they tout the values of openness and sharing of knowledge through software, but they take their tutorial materials and lock them up under proprietary licenses. I hereby publicly call on such organizations (including but not limited to the Linux Foundation) to license materials such as those under CC BY-SA.

I did not make this public call for liberation of such materials without first trying friendly diplomacy first. Conservancy has been in talks with individuals and staff who produce these materials for some time. We urged them to join the Free Software community and share their materials under free licenses. We even offered volunteer time to help them improve those materials if they would simply license them freely. After two years of that effort, it's now abundantly clear that public pressure is the only force that might work0. Ultimately, like all proprietary businesses, the training divisions of +Linux Foundation Linux Training Services and other entities in the compliance industrial complex (such as +Black Duck Software) realize they can make much more revenue by making materials proprietary and choosing legal restrictions that forbid their students from sharing and improving the materials after they complete the course. While the reality of this impasse regarding freely licensing these materials is probably an obvious outcome, multiple sources inside these organizations have also confirmed for me that liberation of the materials for the good of general public won't happen without a major paradigm shift — specifically because such educational freedom will reduce the revenue stream around those materials.

Of course, I can attest first-hand that freely liberating tutorial materials curtails revenue. Karen Sandler and I have regularly taught courses on copyleft licensing based on the freely available materials for a few years — most recently in January 2017 at LinuxConf Australia and at at OSCON in a few weeks. These conferences do kindly cover our travel expenses to attend and teach the tutorial, but compliance education is not a revenue stream for Conservancy. While, in an ideal world, we'd get revenue from education to fund our other important activities, we believe that there is value in doing this education as currently funded by our individual Supporters; these education efforts fit withour charitable mission to promote the public good. We furthermore don't believe that locking up the materials and refusing to share them with others fits a mission of software freedom, so we never considered such as a viable option. Finally, given the institutionally-backed FUD that we've continue to witness, we seek to draw specific attention to the fundamental difference in approach that Conservancy (as a charity) take toward this compliance education work. (My my recent talk on compliance covered on LWN includes some points on that matter, if you'd like further reading).
Add a comment...

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Private Internet Access launches $50,000 match for Software Freedom Conservancy

Today on Giving Tuesday, Software Freedom Conservancy announces a generous match by Private Internet Access of $50,000 towards our current fundraiser.

Until January 15, Supporters count twice toward our fundraising goals! If you join or renew as a Supporter now, Private Internet Access will contribute matching support. The next 416 Supporters (both new or renewing, monthly or annually) will have the impact of 832 Supporters. Giving now will quickly advance the progress in our fundraiser and help sustain much of Conservancy's work for free and open source software.

With the funds provided by previous match donors in 2016, Conservancy is over 60% towards our goal of 2,500 Supporters which we need to continue our full programmatic activities through 2017. Become a Supporter today!

The match includes renewing annual supporters, and new supporters who join monthly or annually.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
November 23, 2016

“Principles of Community-Oriented GPL Compliance” Now in Chinese

Software Freedom Conservancy is pleased to announce that the Kaiyuanshe Legal Committee has translated the Principles of Community-Oriented GPL Compliance in Chinese. Kaiyuanshe, roughly translated as "open source alliance," is a group of enterprises, communities, and individuals in China supporting and promoting free and open source software. The document is available for download on Kaiyuanshe's web site and on Conservancy's site in HTML and as a PDF.

The Principles were published by Conservancy and the Free Software Foundation last year, and set forth norms around community-oriented enforcement, removing uncertainty for companies who face compliance actions and providing criteria for evaluating whether license compliance is in the community's interest. The translation was primarily worked on by Richard Lin and Maggie Wang, members of the Kaiyuanshe Legal Committee.

"More and more Chinese companies are embracing Free and Open Source Software, but not enough participants truly understand our communities' expectations around compliance," said Lin, Community Director for Huawei Developer Zone. "We in Kaiyuanshe want to help more people to truly understand Free and Open Source Software, and call for more people, organizations and companies to contribute together."

"The principles are good education and very clear to put into practice," added Wang, Representative in China for Ladas & Parry LLP. "I believe the publication of the Principles will ease the tension for a lot of companies who are willing to adopt GPL'd software."

Karen Sandler, Executive Director of Conservancy commented, "This is part of the impressive work undertaken by the Kaiyuanshe Legal Committee. This coordination by Kaiyuanshe shows the strength of all of the organizations and companies that have come together in China."
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
+Linux Weekly News has an article about The GPL Compliance BoF Session at +Linux Foundation Events ' Linux Plumbers Conference.
Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded