Re: GPL and FSF (was Re: JFS)

[mah@everybody.org (Mark A. Hershberger)]

[This is my last message on this subject to tech@openbsd.org]

>>>>> "BG" == Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> writes:

    BG> At the end of the GPL are detailed instructions saying how to
    BG> license code under the GPL. If these instructions are
    BG> followed, the code isn't just licensed under the CURRENT
    BG> version of the GPL but under any future one the FSF later
    BG> releases. Yes, thats right: the FSF can change the terms at
    BG> any time. Thus, it effectively gains COMPLETE control of how
    BG> the software can be used.

The boilerplate terms:

    This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
    it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
    the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
    (at your option) any later version.

Assume that the FSF has released a new license that says, in effect,
"The FSF owns this code."  Say, version 666.  In that case, the _user
of the software_ would be the one with the power to determine who
controlled the software.  Now, IANAL, but that seems very shaky
legally.  Many authors would be understandably upset.  And, given that
the GPL has not yet been court-tested, I don't think that is a risk
the FSF wants to take.  I don't think they want to undermine free
software by upsetting the contributors.

So, your worst case scenario seems not that realistic to me.
Possible, perhaps, but a move so foolish that I don't think the FSF
would ever attempt it.

    BG> All authors who contributes to any "GNU" project must grant
    BG> all rights to the code to the FSF. So, in fact, this is quite
    BG> common.  The FSF has ALL rights to GCC, GNOME, etc.

Since rms is the original author of GCC, I don't think he minds that
they have all the rights.

Additionally, since you have the choice to retain any freedoms you
currently have under the GPL if the FSF releases version 666, I don't
think it is reasonable to worry about the possibility.  Simply choose
to license the software under the earlier license.

If you want to complain about what you perceive as a lack of freedom
under the current GPL, go ahead.  Lots of people don't like the GPL
because they feel it limits them now.  But I'm not going to buy any
conspiracy theories about what the FSF might do in the future.

Mark.