The Rules of Open Source and Collaboration: Copyright and Public License

■ Richard Lin 林旅強 (legist 強 )

■ [email protected]

■ http://about.me/richard.lin

■ http://fb.me/legist

These slides are licensed under creative commons - attribution - share alike 3.0 unported.

Hong Kong Open Source Conference 2014香港開源年會 2014/3/29 Sat.

The Rules of Open Source and Collaboration:Copyright and Public License




■ The Default Rule of Copyright and the goal of Free/ Open Source Software

■ The Legal Framework to Protect Open Source and Collaboration: Public License and Copyleft

■ Conclusion

About Me

About MeAbout Me

■ Name / Nickname■ Richard Lin 林旅強 / Legist Qiang (強哥 )

■ Position■ GitCafe, D.G.Z Information Technology Ltd. (2014- )■ Legal Specialty / Campus & Community Promoter

in OSSF, CITI, Academia Sinica (2009-2014)■ Publish (in Chinese)

■ Legal Issues On OSS commercial application– 開放源碼軟體商業應用之法律爭議及其可能之解決途徑

■ Empowering Citizens with Data: An Open Government Data Handbook

– 藏智於民：開放政府資料的原則與現況 (slideshare)

http://www.slideshare.net/legist/ss-27158291

About GitCafe

GitCafeGitCafe

GitCafeGitCafe

Project HostingProject Hosting

■ Create project on GitCafe, upload the source code managed by Git.

■ Within 5 minutes, you will have a powerful platform to show your project to the world.

Join CommunityJoin Community

■ GitCafe is more than project hosting.■ It's a great community made up of hackers and

makers who want to make cool stuffs together.

Collaborative Team WorkCollaborative Team Work

■ Need people to collaborate to your project? That's what GitCafe about!

■ You can get involved in others' projects or vice versa just with few clicks.

GitCafeGitCafe

■ GitCafe■ Project Hosting

– Git

■ Join Community■ Team Work

■ Open Source Activities in Campus and Community■ Lecture/ Speech■ Workshop■ Hackathon

Disclaimer

DisclaimerDisclaimer

■ These slides are published by and refects thepersonal views of Richard Lin, in his individual capacity.

■ It does not represent the views of any communities, organizations, companies, or entities.

Here we go!






■ Conclusion

Intellectual Property: CocaColaIntellectual Property: CocaCola

本圖之取用特別聲明在自由軟體推廣演講中主張「合理使用」，讀者請勿更行移置他用。http://www.colorcn.com.cn/UpLoadFiles/pic/2007-7/2007072614015243711.jpg

http://www.colorcn.com.cn/UpLoadFiles/pic/2007-7/2007072614015243711.jpg

Copyright: Protect Expression, not ideaCopyright: Protect Expression, not idea

本圖之取用特別聲明在非商業性、學術推廣演講中主張「合理使用」，讀者請勿更行移置他用。 http://byfiles.storage.live.com/y1p_GGIwBtrLLjVacYuiWIPhc8OVJta1Hw4r5Rr84yef7u3FggNVSHQbdlMmG4LulDuz7NKFe4g28k

Patent: Whole new technologyPatent: Whole new technology

Jo and Paul (CC) by-nc-sa 2.0；取用來源為 : http://www.fickr.com/photos/24637969@N00/2730911205/lightbox/#/photos/24637969@N00/2730911205/

Trade Mark: BrandingTrade Mark: Branding

本圖內含可口可樂公司之註冊商標，特別聲明在非商業性、學術推廣演講中主張「合理使用」，讀者請勿將該商標更行移置他用。本圖片拍攝者（著作權人）為林旅強，採用創用 CC 「姓名標示 - 非商業性」 3.0 台灣條款授權。

『 Coca-Cola 』

『 Coke 』

『可口可樂』

『曲線瓶』

『弧形飄帶』

Trade Mark: BrandingTrade Mark: Branding

本圖取自網路，特別聲明在非商業性、學術推廣演講中主張「合理使用」，讀者請勿將該圖片更行移置他用。

『 Coca-Cola 』

『 Coke 』

『可口可樂』

『曲線瓶』的形狀

『弧形飄帶』圖案

Trade Secret: RecipeTrade Secret: Recipe

Just keep the secret

No registration

What's the secret in anopen source project?

本圖之取用特別聲明在創用 CC推廣演講中主張「合理使用」，讀者請勿更行移置他用；取用來源為 : http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_BlU5V5BaMjY/SkOUBHQH84I/AAAAAAAAE_Q/5Vv3qP7ZYao/s1600/CokeSecretIngredient.JPG (右 )

http://www.digitaldeliftp.com/Images/pings/secret_formula_230x150.png (左 )

CopyrightCopyright

■ Copyrighted Work■ Public Domain■ Free

ProprietarySoftware

Public Domain

CopyrightCopyright


All Rights Reserved

©

ProprietarySoftware

Public Domain

CopyrightCopyright


ProprietarySoftware

Public Domain

CopyrightCopyright


ProprietarySoftware

Public Domain

No Rights Reserved

©

CopyrightCopyright


ProprietarySoftware

Public Domain

No Rights Reserved

©

You can doanything you want

theoretical ly

CopyrightCopyright


ProprietarySoftware

Public Domain

No Rights Reserved

©

You can doanything you want

theoretical ly?

CopyrightCopyright


ProprietarySoftware

Public Domain

The work is over thecopyright protection

period or the copyright holder says: I don't hold my copyright anymore.

CopyrightCopyright


ProprietarySoftware

Public Domain

The work is over thecopyright protection

period or the copyright holder says: I don't hold my copyright anymore.

Public DomainPublic Domain

Public DomainPublic Domain

CopyrightCopyright


ProprietarySoftware

Public Domain

CopyrightCopyright


ProprietarySoftware

Public Domain

Free picture?Free font?

Free music?

Welcom to usemy work?






■ Conclusion

CopyrightCopyright

©Gisle Hannemyr, CC by-sa 3.0 unported, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rms_ifi_large.jpg

■ The world without software copyright■ Richard M. Stallman and Xerox

合理使用 ©http://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/physical-object/xerox/X750-86.lg.jpg

CopyrightCopyright

■ The world without software copyright■ Richard M. Stallman and Xerox Printer

■ After we have software copyright■ 1980s■ Business model

呵呵(Fake Dialogue)

( 設計對白 )

What the F...

● The world w ithout software copyright● Richard M . Stallman and Xerox Printer

● After we have software copyright● 1980s● Business model

(Fake dialogue)( 設計對白 )

CopyrightCopyright

■ The world without software copyright■ Richard M. Stallman and Xerox Printer

■ After we have software copyright■ 1980s■ Business model

■ Richard M. Stallman: Free Software!

Free SoftwareFree Software

■ Free Software■ Free Software Foundation (FSF) 1985-■ Fundamentalism


■ Free Software■ Free Software Foundation (FSF) 1985-■ Fundamentalism■ GNU Project

GNU's Not Unix


■ Free Software■ Free Software Foundation (FSF) 1985■ Fundamentalism■ GNU Project■ GNU General Public License

Free Software DefinitionFree Software Definition

■ The freedom to run the program, for any purpose

(freedom 0).

■ The freedom to study how the program works, and

change it to make it do what you wish (freedom 1).

■ The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your

neighbor (freedom 2).

■ The freedom to distribute copies of your modified

versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you

can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes.

Run the Program



(freedom 0).








Study & Change



(freedom 0).








Redistribute



(freedom 0).








Distribute copiesof modified version

The Free Software DefinitionThe Free Software Definition


(freedom 0).








散佈 Distribute

修改 Modify

研究 Study

使用 Run



(freedom 0).








散佈 Distribute

修改 Modify

研究 Study

使用 Run

How aboutPublic Domain?

How to protect the freedom?How to protect the freedom?

■ Public Domain allows people to share the program and their improvements, if they are so minded. But it also allows uncooperative people to convert the program into proprietary software.

■ People who receive the program in that modified form do not have the freedom that the original author gave them; the middleman has stripped it away.




Public Domaincan be transferred

to Proprietaryeasily.

Public Domaincan not make surethe four freedoms

keep going.




Public Domaincan be transferred

to Proprietaryeasily.

Public Domaincan not make surethe four freedoms

keep going.

Public Domainis an option for

copyright holder todecide how his/her work can be usedby other people.



(freedom 0).










(freedom 0).








Free = 不要錢 !?

Free = You don't have to pay for it !?



(freedom 0).








Free = 不要錢 !?




(freedom 0).








Free = 不要錢 !?


免費女神 !?

Statue of Gratis!?



(freedom 0).








Free = 不要錢 !?

當然不是 !Defnitely NOT!



(freedom 0).









To understand the concept, you should think of “free”

as in “free speech,” not as in “free beer.”



(freedom 0).








But people used to

misunderstand the

meaning of “Free”



(freedom 0).








So the other name

of free software

appears...



(freedom 0).








Open Source

Open Source SoftwareOpen Source Software

■ Open Source Software 開放源碼軟體


■ Open Source Software■ Bruce Perens & Eric Steven Raymond

開放源碼軟體

©Doc Searls CC by-sa 2.0 unported, http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Eric_S_Raymond.jpg

This picture is downloaded here: http://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs181/projects/open-source/bruce.jpg

Just for fair use in this slide and not granted any license to any other use.


■ Open Source Software■ Bruce Perens & Eric Steven Raymond■ Open Source Initiative (OSI) 1998-

開放源碼促進會


■ Open Source Software■ Bruce Perens & Eric Steven Raymond■ Open Source Initiative (OSI) 1998-■ Eclecticism: commercial thinking


■ Open Source Software■ Bruce Perens & Eric Steven Raymond■ Open Source Initiative (OSI) 1998-■ Eclecticism: commercial thinking■ The Cathedral and the Bazaar






■ Conclusion

LicenseLicense

■ License– 許可證– 授權（授權條款）

■ The rule is from property law■ You can use my property, only if...

– The conditions are met.

■ FOSS License■ Prerequisites: the licensor has the right

(copyright) to license.

Public LicensePublic License

■ Advantage:■ You can just use open source code without

gaining permission as long as all the conditions of the license are met.– The problem of “Nail House ( 釘子戶 )” of a

collaborative work by many contributors– Use = Agree the Terms– Free to join, Free to fork.

Public LicensePublic License

■ Legal cost:■ If you don't comply the license, it happens two

legal cost: – Not only breach of the contract ( 違約 ),– But also infringement ( 侵權 ).

■ If someone violates the license, the licensor can use the weapon offered by copyright law:– Demages 損害賠償– Injunction 假處分 / 禁制令（商品下架）– Criminal liability 刑事責任

The mechanism of open source: CopyleftThe mechanism of open source: Copyleft

■ Copyleft 著佐權■ Characteristic:

■ To ensure the four freedoms■ Based on copyright law■ Pre-license to the public■ One who makes

modifications must licensethe derivative work withthe same license.

授權拘束性License Inheritance

GPL

Proprietary Software License

LGPL

AGPLEPL/CPL

MIT/BSD

Apache2.0

MPL/CDDL

Spectrum of Freedom & RestrictionSpectrum of Freedom & Restriction

Public Domain

GPL


LGPL

AGPLEPL/CPL

MIT/BSD

Apache2.0

MPL/CDDL


Public Domain

Copyleft Non-Copyleft

GPL


LGPL

AGPLEPL/CPL

MIT/BSD

Apache2.0

MPL/CDDL


Public Domain

Non-CopyleftStrong Copyleft Weak Copyleft

GPL


AGPL


Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

GPL


AGPL


Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

GeneralPublic

License

DerivativeWork

must licenseunder GPL

LinkModifyMerge

GPL


AGPL


Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

GeneralPublic

License

DerivativeWork


LinkModifyMerge

Exp.Seperate &

Independent

GPL


AGPL


Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

GeneralPublic

License

DerivativeWork


LinkModifyMerge

Exp.Seperate &

IndependentI open to you,you also have

to open to others我佛心對你

你也要佛心對人

GPL


AGPL


Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

GeneralPublic

License

DerivativeWork


LinkModifyMerge

Exp.Seperate &

IndependentI open to you,you also have

to open to others我佛心對你

你也要佛心對人

Take it orleave it.

不爽不要用

How to trigger the obligation of Copyleft?How to trigger the obligation of Copyleft?

Alice

binary &source code

GPLedProgram A

DerivativeProgram B

Bob


Alice

binary &source code

GPLedProgram A

DerivativeProgram B

Bob

B can be closed.Even if you know thatB exists, you don't

have any right to ask Bto open source.


Alice

binary &source code

GPLedProgram A

DerivativeProgram B

Bob

distributebinarycode

Charlie


Alice

binary &source code

GPLedProgram A

DerivativeProgram B

Bob


Charlie

I want tomodify it.

Give methe source

code


Alice

binary &source code

GPLedProgram A

DerivativeProgram B

Bob


Charlie

I want tomodify it.

Give methe source

code

Bobmustopen

source


Alice

binary &source code

GPLedProgram A

DerivativeProgram B

Bob


Charlie

I want tomodify it.

Give methe source

code

Bobmustopen

source

The act triggers the obligation of

Copyleft

GPL


AGPL


Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

GPL


AGPL

The ASP loophole in GPLThe ASP loophole in GPL

Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

Softwareas a

Service

ApplicationServiceProvider

CloudComputing

GPL


AGPL

The ASP loophole in GPLThe ASP loophole in GPL

Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

Softwareas a

Service

ApplicationServiceProvider


CloudComputing

㗅！拿不到 code 呀

( 設計對白 )

GPL


AGPL


Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

AfferoGPL

(AGPL)

Net-basedCopyleft

Use

Modify

GPL


AGPL


Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

AfferoGPL

(AGPL)

Net-basedCopyleft

Use

If you just useAGPL program,you don't have

to release underAGPL

GPL


AGPL


Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

AfferoGPL

(AGPL)

Net-basedCopyleft

Modify

If you modify the project or

mergethe code to your own project,

you have torelease yourproject under

AGPL.

GPL


AGPL


Public Domain

Strong Copyleft

AfferoGPL

(AGPL)

Net-basedCopyleft

Use

Modify


■ The obligation to open source:

■ The derivative work will keep the same license and conditions, so the freedom wouldn't be taken.

■ The derivative of derivative works...The open source code will be more and more.

■ The copyright holder will have stronger bargaining power to “uncooperative people” and hasstanding to ask them to open source.


■ The obligation to open source:

■ Companies may not like it because

– Their copyright will be forced to open– They see the code as their trade secret and

commercial advantage■ But they'll be sue if not comply with the rule.

■ Another problem is license compatibility.

■ Many copyleft licenses are notcompatible with each other.

– Ex: GPL-2.0 / GPL-3.0


LGPL

EPL/CPL

MPL/CDDL


Public Domain

Weak Copyleft


LGPL

EPL/CPL

MPL/CDDL


Public Domain

Weak CopyleftLibraryLesser

Copyleftis lesser


LGPL

EPL/CPL

MPL/CDDL


Public Domain


Copyleftis lesser

Use

Modify


LGPL

EPL/CPL

MPL/CDDL


Public Domain


Copyleftis lesser

Use

Dynamic link:You don't have to

release yourprogram under

LGPL.


LGPL

EPL/CPL

MPL/CDDL


Public Domain


Copyleftis lesser

Modify

If you modify the lib or

merge the lib to your own projectwith statics link,

you have torelease yourproject under

LGPL.

Weak CopyleftWeak Copyleft

■ File based copyleft■ MPL: Mozilla Public License■ CDDL: Common Development and Distribution

License■ Module based copyleft

■ EPL: Eclipse Public License■ CPL: Common Public License

MPLMPL

MPL X

Y YYX

X

Y

X

Y

MPL

MPLX LicenseY License

Compatible with each other.

MPL Program


MIT/BSD

Apache2.0


Public Domain

Non-Copyleft


MIT/BSD

Apache2.0


Public Domain

Non-CopyleftMITBSD

Apache

Copyrightnotice

Disclaimer

Example of BSD licenseExample of BSD license


Copyright Notice


Copyright Notice


License Content


License Content


Disclaimer


免責聲明Disclaimer


著作權聲明Copyright Notice

免責聲明Disclaimer

授權範圍


MIT/BSD

Apache2.0


Public Domain

Non-CopyleftMITBSD

Apache

Copyrightnotice

Disclaimer

GPL


LGPL

AGPLEPL/CPL

MIT/BSD

Apache2.0

MPL/CDDL


Public Domain

Copyleft Non-Copyleft

GPL


LGPL

AGPLEPL/CPL

MIT/BSD

Apache2.0

MPL/CDDL


Public Domain

Non-CopyleftStrong Copyleft Weak Copyleft

How to choose license?How to choose license?

■ To the original copyright holder■ Choose any license you want

– Strong/ weak/ non copyleft– Compatibility with relative open source project– Business model, ex: dual-license

How to choose license?How to choose license?

■ To derivative software holder■ You take the code from copyleft project

– GPL● all your code in the same project

– LGPL● It depends on whether you use dynamic link or statics link to the library,

or directly develop your lib base on the LGPL lib.

– MPL/ EPL● If you use the files/ modules from MPL/ EPL project to create new files/

modules, then you should open them; if you don't use any code from the original files/ modules, then you have the whole copyright of your patch.

■ You take the code from non-copyleft project– You just need to meet the only two conditions (copyright notice

and disclaimer), you can do any thing you want, including using any other open source licenses or even commercial license to release your code (or not release).






■ Conclusion

Cases of GPL violationCases of GPL violation

■ To open or not to open, that is NOT a question...■ Until the companies lose the cases...

Harald Welte v. D-link

BusyBox v. 14 companies

2006

2009



2006

2009

Welte v. D-Link (2006)Welte v. D-Link (2006)

German Branch

msdosfs, initrd, mtd1. A part of Linux kernel2. Copyright holders:

Werner Almesberger (Austria)David Woodhouse (UK)Harald Welte (Germany)

Use source code


Harald Welte

Ask



German Branch

RepresentativeAuthorization

Use source code


Harald Welte

Ask



German Branch???I don't know what you're saying...


Use source code


Harald Welte




German Branch

FrankfurtDistrict Court

Sue

Infringement

Use source code


Harald Welte




German Branch

FrankfurtDistrict Court

Sue

Infringement

Allcustomers

Use source code

1. open source codes

2. GPL notifcation

damages

BusyBox v. 14 companies 2009

Busybox v. 14 companies (2009)Busybox v. 14 companies (2009)

Defenders are 14companies

Busybox combines tiny versions of many common UNIX utilities into a single small executable.

Licensed under GPL-2.0.

Copyright holder:● Erik Anderson (US)● Other developers

Use source code

Best Buy, Samsung, We s t i n g h o u s e ,

JVC, WD, Robert Bosch, Phoebe Mircro, Humanx,

Comtrend ( 康全科技 ) , Dobbs-Standford, Versa,

Zyxel ( 合勤科技 ) , Astak, GCI






Use source code






Use source code

United StatesDistrict ofNew York

Sue

Erik AndersonFree Software Conservancy






Use source code

Erik AndersonFree Software Conservancy

United StatesDistrict ofNew York

Sue

1. Many upstream OEMs/ODMs Manufacturers are Taiwan Companies.2. 13 companies settled out of courtor are working with FSC.3. The court is ordering Westinghouse topay $90,000 in damages and to give theHDTVs that include the BusyBox code to the Conservancy.

Industry AdoptionIndustry Adoption

■ To open or not to open, that is NOT a question...■ Until the companies lose the cases...



2006

2009






■ Conclusion

Free Material besides codeFree Material besides code

■ Creative Commons■ 創用 CC

Creative CommonsCreative Commons

■ 4 elements, 6 choices■ Attribution (BY)■ Non-Commercial (NC)■ Non-Derivative (ND)■ Share Alike (SA)

NotFree

NotFree

copyleft

Free



NotFree

NotFree

copyleft

Free



NotFree

NotFree

copyleft

Free

NotFree

NotFree

NotFree

NotFree

copyleft

Free


Proprietary Public Domain

BY

BY-NC

BY-SA

BY-NC-SA

BY-ND

BY-NC-ND



BY

BY-NC

BY-SA

BY-NC-SA

BY-ND

BY-NC-ND

BY

Attr ibution



BY

BY-NC

BY-SA

BY-NC-SA

BY-ND

BY-NC-ND

NC

morerestr ict ion



BY

BY-NC

BY-SA

BY-NC-SA

BY-ND

BY-NC-ND

Share Alike

Copyleft



BY

BY-NC

BY-SA

BY-NC-SA

BY-ND

BY-NC-ND

ND

can't bemodified



BY

BY-NC

BY-SA

BY-NC-SA

BY-ND

BY-NC-ND

Free

NotFree

NotFree

NotFree

NotFree

copyleft

copyleft



BY

BY-NC

BY-SA

BY-NC-SA

BY-ND

BY-NC-ND

Free

NotFree

NotFree

NotFree

NotFree

copyleft

copyleft

Compatiblewith

open source &free software

def in i t ion






■ Conclusion

ConclusionConclusion

■ Open Source benefts everything.■ Lack of

■ Compliance with Intellectual Property■ Culture of contribution■ Hacker ethics

■ Community is a long-term support of F/OSS.

License

■ This slides are licensed under creative commons - attribution - share alike 3.0 unported.

■ Richard Lin (Legist Q iang) 2014, The Rules of Open Source and Collaboration: Copyright and Public License



Internet

The Rules of Open Source and Collaboration: Copyright and Public License