GPL software licence has ramifications
For the London Free Press – July 30, 2007
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) recently released the newest version of its General Public Licence, commonly known as GPL v.3. The GPL is a common open-source licence that governs the use of certain software.
Anyone that modifies and distributes GPL-licensed software, or uses GPL-licensed software as part of its product offerings, should consider the ramifications of the new licence. There is not much to be concerned about if one is merely using software licensed under the GPL.
Open-source software is software that includes the source code, or human-written version of the software, along with the object code, or machine-written software. While it’s often available for free, the defining attribute is that the user gets the source code, which it is able to modify and distribute. The GPL is one of many open-source licences.
One part of the GPL that has carried risk for businesses using it to develop and distribute software, is that they may be obligated to provide their source code to customers, depending on how it has been done.
Version 3 contains several revisions. The most notable ones involve patents and what has been referred to as “anti-TiVoization.” Some of the language has become more legal in nature, which should make it easier to interpret. The GPL was originally drafted as a philosophy or manifesto. That meant while it was easy to understand the perspective of the licence, it was not always easy to understand how it worked in individual fact situations.
The licence contains an explicit patent grant, meaning that any entity that contributes software using the GPL grants with it a perpetual, royalty-free licence to any of its patents that apply to the software.
It also contains a provision to block future deals similar to that between Microsoft and Novell, in which Microsoft protected customers of Novell’s Suse Linux Enterprise Server from certain Microsoft patent-infringement lawsuits. Under GPL 3, if one provides patent protection to some software users, that protection is automatically extended to everyone who gets the software, no matter how.
TiVo personal video recorders use Linux, which is governed by the GPL. The GPL’s authors didn’t like that TiVo was designed to not work if someone modified the software, so they included provisions to discourage restrictions on modification.
If you obtain software using GPL 3, you are bound by it. But software creators are still able to provide their product under GPL 2, if they wish.
While this may sound complex, as with any contract, the important thing is to understand the ramifications of the GPL, or any open-source licence, before using open-source software for anything but internal purposes.
The issues can be dealt with, but they need to be considered early, as a different approach to programming and distribution may be required to meet your needs.




