June 23, 2009

Episode 0x10: Carlo Piana and the EU Antitrust Case Against Microsoft

Summary

Karen and Bradley interview Carlo Piana, a lawyer who has worked extensively in the E.U. Microsoft Anti-Trust case.

This show was released on Tuesday 23 June 2009; its running time is 00:44:49.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:31)

• Karen mentioned she owned a thinkgeek shirt that has a visual joke about number base systems. (01:13)
• Bradley misspoke saying that 10 in binary would make it the second show. Of course, it would make it the third show if we numbered in binary, since we start numbering at zero. (01:50)
• Bradley mentioned that the Software Freedom Law Show crowd sources its marketing. (03:30)
• Bradley mentioned that the US Antitrust case against Microsoft, which included both the federal government in the USA, and many State/Commonwealth Attorneys General, many of which settled separately. (05:17)
• This show discussed the EU Antitrust case against Microsoft. (08:30)

Segment 1 (11:18)

• Carlo mentioned that materials about the EU/Microsoft Antitrust case takes up 4-5 square meters of his office. (14:20)
• The EU case started with an ancient complaint by Sun Microsystems. (15:10)
• Carlo mentioned Novell was more dominate historically in Europe than in the USA, and Novell had been more Unix-friendly and compatibility-friendly. As Microsoft became dominant, Sun complained. (15:50)
• The integration of Windows Media Player into Windows was one of the issues raised in the EU case. (16:50)
• EU required Microsoft to provide timely and complete interoperability information so that competitors can create working replacements. This made Samba the natural client for Carlo in this case. (17:56)
• Microsoft challenged the decision, saying that it would give a “free ride” to their competitors, (19:45) and claimed the information wasn't necessary to achieve interoperability, because they could just reverse engineer or implement from standards documents. (20:18) Microsoft sited Samba as an example of how reverse engineering could work. (20:45) Carlo called this a lame excuse. (21:10)
• Carlo said that the EU entirely rejected Microsoft's excuses. (22:46)
• With the help of SFLC, Carlo was able to negotiate licensing conditions that were GPL-compatible. This was necessary because EU allowed RAND licensing of the protocol information, which is often problematic for GPL-compatibility (which typically requires RF licensing). (25:55)
• The compromise required that USD$10,000 be paid by the Protocol Freedom Information Foundation, and after that GPL-compatible licensing for the protocol information was available generally to Samba and the entire community. (26:3)
• Unfortunately, patent claims held by Microsoft are outside of the agreement. Carlo continues to make efforts on this. (27:23)
• Carlo is also working on the OOXML issue (31:10), which Carlo says is clearly an antitrust violation. (33:30)
• In the EU third parties interested can be heard by the Commission early in the process. (34:20)
• Carlo mentioned that the participation and testimony of the Samba team, in particular Jeremy Allison and Andrew Tridgell, was central to make a convincing case to the EU court. (36:25)

Segment 2 (39:29)

• Bradley believes that the most important people in the Free Software world are doing things that no one else is willing to do. (39:40)
• Karen pointed out that the international nature of Free Software means that the success in the EU helps developers around the world. (42:30)

Tags: bkuhn, karen, numbering, microsoft, anti-trust

June 15, 2009

Special Episode: Amicus Brief in Jacobsen v. Katzer

Summary

Karen and Bradley discuss the SFLC's amicus brief in the Jacobsen v. Katzer with their colleague, Aaron Williamson.

This show was released on Monday 15 June 2009; its running time is 00:19:01.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:27)

• Bradley referred to the two different types of Latin pronunciation, which he learned in school as: Classic and Church. (01:33)
• Karen explains what an amicus brief is. (01:47)
• Aaron explained that the earlier court ruling that was a success for Free Software. (03:38)
• An injunction in this context is a ruling from a court that the violator of the license must stop their activity that infringes the copyright. (05:46)
• Karen explained why Free Software licenses are interpreted as copyright licenses rather than contracts, and why that is advantageous. (06:15)
• Aaron explained why preliminary injunctions are a particular important remedy for Free Software developers. (07:00)
• Karen mentioned we would have a direct link to our brief in the show notes, which is there and in the summary as well. (10:45)
• Bradley mentioned his work regarding the Artistic-1.0 license (which is detailed in a blog post). (11:30, 13:30)
• Each court has a different admission process. (14:27)

Tags: bkuhn, karen, copyrights, aaronw, jacobsen

June 9, 2009

Episode 0x0F: Your Questions

Summary

In this episode, Karen and Bradley take questions that listeners have emailed and dented to them over the past few months.

This show was released on Tuesday 9 June 2009; its running time is 00:46:01.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:31)

• Bradley referred to David Letterman's old Viewer Mail Theme. The Letterman FAQ has lyrics to a Viewer Mail Song, but it's not the one that Bradley remembers. Bradley remembers one that Dave called a “nee-na-nee-nee” song that had only the words It's Viewer Mail Time repeated over and over. It was probably from the late 1980s on the old NBC show.
• Bradley mentioned that his old FSF speeches talk about his time as a proprietary software developer and why he vowed never to do it again. (08:49)
• Bradley mentioned that he and Eric (one of the listeners who sent in a question) are fans of the show, Pushing Daisies. (09:40)
• Bradley mentioned that the Nautilus was originally written by a company called Eazel that failed during the dot.com era. (17:04)

Segment 1 (24:22)

• Bradley said their last segment was like the Argument Monty Python Sketch. Karen says that it isn't. (24:30)
• Karen mentions that SFLC's Compliance Guide talks in details about how to do source provisions under GPLv2 and GPLv3. (27:32)
• Bradley's favorite license is the Affero GPL. (28:26)
• Christian asked about the Creative Commons licenses. (33:00)
• At 35:44, you can hear the beginnings of people making coffee in the kitchen that is mentioned at the end of the show.

Tags: bkuhn, karen, questions

May 26, 2009

Episode 0x0E: John Sullivan of the Free Software Foundation

Summary

Bradley and Karen interview John Sullivan, Manager of Operations at the Free Software Foundation about their various advocacy campaigns.

This show was released on Tuesday 26 May 2009; its running time is 00:35:54.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:32)

• The FSF and Cisco settled their lawsuit, for which SFLC represented FSF. (01:19)
• Karen has participated for the last two years on the “Law of Software Contracts” ALI draft, which was adopted by the ALI this week. (03:20)

Segment 1 (05:51)

• We previously had as a guest Brett Smith of the FSF (on 0x02). (05:59)
• John Sullivan works on the campaigns as the Manager of Operations. (06:11)
• John listed various campaigns that FSF has done since the GPLv3 process:
• Defective by Design. (07:05)
• Play Ogg. (07:14)
• Badvista. (07:30)
• Libre Planet (07:56), which Karen noted was also a conference. (08:55)
• We discussed some of the parodies of the iPod commercials that were part of the Defective by Design Campaign. (12:45)
• The FSF helps support the RIAA expert Witness Fund. (15:20)
• We discussed John's essay, War on Sharing: Why the FSF Cares About RIAA Lawsuits. (16:40)
• We discussed issues where individuals don't understand that copying of some things is permitted. For example, this teacher took away GNU/Linux disks from a student, assuming distribution was prohibited.
• Karen noted a few legal points: works are covered by copyright for a limited period of time, and then fall into the “public domain”. (21:00) There is also a concept of “fair use” of works still under copyright. Further, the DMCA provides for criminal penalties if you circumvent technological anti-copying measures. (22:09)
• FSF filed a brief (PDF) in the SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum case. (25:51)
• The RIAA directly attacked and complained about the FSF brief, which is a rare occurrence. (27:30)
• FSF is hiring a campaigns manager and is looking for applications. (30:04)
• John encouraged people to look at the LibrePlanet Wiki. (30:33)

Segment 2 (31:07)

• Karen does volunteer work to help QuestionCopyright.org. (32:07)
• Karen participated in the EFF's Bootcamp, at which Corynne McSherry gave a speech on fair use. The EFF publishes materials specifically about fair use. (33:40)

Tags: bkuhn, karen, fsf, John Sullivan

May 12, 2009

Episode 0x0D: Stormy Peters of the GNOME Foundation

Summary

Bradley and Karen interview the Executive Director of the GNOME Foundation, Stormy Peters.

This show was released on Tuesday 12 May 2009; its running time is 00:35:22.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:29)

• Karen mentioned the Delta Delta Delta Saturday Night Live skit, when referring to the show number, 0x0D. (00:36)
• Bradley referred to his confusion two episodes ago about mentioning Nehru jackets (00:57). Bradley meant to say “satin baseball jacket”, to refer to the Dead Kennedys' song MTV Get Off The Air. (01:05), but reference to Producer Dan made him think of music and the Beatles first, for various reasons. (Producer Dan's opinions on the Beatles still pending.)
• Bradley mentioned that the only way to talk about music with Free Software is to talk about the Free Software Song, which wouldn't be a good idea. (02:20)
• Bradley mentioned we hadn't previously had SFLC's clients as guests on the show, but Bradley forgot that on the third show, 0x02, Brett Smith of the Free Software Foundation was the guest. (02:50)
• This week's guest is Stormy Peters, Executive Director of the GNOME Foundation can be found as storming on identi.ca. (03:35)

Segment 1 (05:00)

• Stormy discussed her blog post that covers 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(6) forms of non-profit structures. (04:22, 06:02)
• The Linux Foundation is an example of a 501(c)(6) trade association. (07:20)
• We discussed the GNOME Foundation Advisory Board (10:11)
• Karen (and Stormy) mentioned the FSF Membership program. (11:48)
• Stormy mentioned the Friends of GNOME program, that allows individuals to support the GNOME Foundation and its work. (12:37)
• Bradley encouraged everyone to give US$200/year to their favorite FLOSS-related non-profits. (13:18) The FLOSS Foundations Group maintains a directory of FLOSS-related non-profits. (13:46)
• Stormy noted that many for-profit companies have lists of non-profits you can donate to through charitable giving. Bradley didn't get a chance to note during the show that you can often have organizations added to these lists by requesting through the HR department. (15:00)
• Karen mentioned that 501(c)(3) non-profits must meet the public support test. (16:44)
• Stormy mentioned that GNOME could use help on the Usability List and the Marketing list (23:50).
• Stormy mentioned that GUADEC is a major annual conference for GNOME, and this year it will be co-located with KDE's annual conference, Akademy. (26:20)

Segment 2 (29:29)

• Bradley could find no easy online references to the old arguments about KDE being six months ahead of GNOME. He is somewhat relieved this is the case. (30:24)
• Bradley mentioned the Travelocity gnome. (32:10)
• Bradley mentioned that a gnome is featured in the 2001 film, Amélie, being photographed around the world (32:30)
• Bradley mentioned that Free Software author Loïc Dachary does the same thing with a duck.

Tags: bkuhn, karen, Stormy Peters, non-profits, gnome

April 28, 2009

Episode 0x0C: Patently False

Summary

Karen and Bradley discuss the intersections of software patents with FLOSS licenses. They give a general overview of how patents generally interact with FLOSS, and then discuss the patent provisions of specific FLOSS licenses.

This show was released on Tuesday 28 April 2009; its running time is 00:46:50.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:35)

• Bradley suggests that more knowledgeable listeners might want to skip the first segment. (02:22)
• RMS rightly dislikes the term “intellectual property”. He's written about it often. (02:58)
• Karen noted that the USPTO uses term property to describe patents, which Bradley points out isn't actually accurate. (03:10)
• RMS didn't invent, although he did popularize the phrase , “perpetual copyright on the installment plan”. (05:08)
• The USPTO website confirms that the term limits on patents are 20 years. (05:25)
• Bradley mentioned that RSA Data Security, Inc. liberated the RSA a patent a few weeks before it expired. (05:40)
• Bradley and Karen explained what patent trolls are. (08:50)
• The patent section of SFLC's legal guide explains the interactions of FLOSS with the patent system, including covering issues such as what a patent is and what willful infringement is. (10:36)
• Bradley mentioned that Jeremy Allison gave an award reading FATtest Patent Troll to Sam Ramji at the Linux Collaboration Summit, although the only URL we could find documenting this is a identica statement by Bradley himself. (14:25)

Segment 1 (15:08)

• Bradley noted that GPL is a copyright license. This is discussed in detail in the Copyright section of SFLC's legal guide. (16:03)
• GPLv2§6 and GPLv2§7 are the two sections that might interact with patent issues, particularly §7. (20:30)
• Our colleague, Dan Ravicher, has often spoken about the implied patent license GPLv2 grants, including in seminars run by the FSF itself. (21:20)
• Bradley attempted to concisely explain the patent provisions of GPLv3 (mostly in §11). (27:20)
• Bradley mentioned the discussions in the GPLv3 Drafting committees, such as Committee B and Committee C (29:53).
• Ultimately, Bradley took 8 minutes exactly, not counting Karen's 28 second interruption. That's pretty concise, he thinks.
• GPLv3§12 is nearly identical to GPLv2§7. (37:18)

Segment 2 (38:20)

• Bradley explained the patent provisions of the Apache 2.0 license.
• Bradley and Karen discussed SFLC's work against the Blackboard patent. There were news items on SFLC's site when the reexam was filed and when the USPTO ordered the reexam. (42:05)

Tags: bkuhn, karen, sflc, gplv3, patents

April 14, 2009

Episode 0x0B: Thoughts on the TomTom Settlement

Summary

Bradley and Karen discuss the settlement of the Microsoft/TomTom law suit and the implications for the software freedom community.

This show was released on Tuesday 14 April 2009; its running time is 00:34:36.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:29)

• Bradley and Karen were in San Francisco attending the Linux Foundation's Collaboration Summit (00:46)
• “Producer Dan” is Dan Lynch of half baked media. (01:10)
• Bradley mentioned Nehru jackets, notably worn by Ricardo Montalbán as Khan in Star Trek. (01:23)
• On 30 March 2009, Microsoft and TomTom settled their patent dispute. (2:30)
• Bradley mentioned two articles on 29 December 2008 and on 29 January 2009 in SD Times where he and Sam Ramji debated Microsoft's policies toward the FLOSS community. (04:20)
• Karen and Bradley talk about Microsoft's historic patent threats against Linux. Bradley refers to Microsoft's assertions just 16 months before its aggression with TomTom. (4:29)
• Bradley mentions that many agree that Microsoft's FAT file patent should not be considered a valid patent. (6:30)
• Karen discusses periodic filings required by the U.S. securities laws and thresholds of materiality for information to be included in those filings. (12:34)
• Bradley mentioned Section 7 of GPLv2. (14:20)

Segment 1 (17:53)

• Karen discusses the Edgar system, which has since been succeeded by IDEA. The filings that Karen mentions of Novell's agreements with Microsoft (with confidential treatment) are available here and here. (21:40)
• Bradley explained the date in Section 11 of GPLv3 that puts companies on notice that side patent deals after that date would violate GPLv3. (23:18)

Tags: bkuhn, karen, gplv3, patents

March 31, 2009

Episode 0x0A: A Guide to GPL Compliance

Summary

This episode is primarily composed of a recorded speech that Bradley made on complying with the GPL. An introduction and wrap-up segment with Bradley and Karen is included.

Note: The audio available for this podcast between 06:06 and 10:45 US/Eastern on 31 March 2009 had a mono/stereo issue. That has been corrected. Sorry for the inconvenience.

This show was released on Tuesday 31 March 2009; its running time is 00:56:26.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:29)

• Bradley mentioned being a member of ΥΠΕ (aka UPE), the Computer Science Honors Society, and that their year of founding appears on the seal in binary. Bradley was correct about this, but said the wrong year during the show. The year is actually 1967, which is 11110101111. (01:30)
• The Mayan numbering system was actually base 20, which is close enough to 10 that Bradley's point probably isn't valid, and he awaits for the 2, 8 or 16 base culture to be founded. (02:38)
• Bradley mentioned using the NATO alphabet to read off hexadecimal numbers. (05:53)

Segment 1 (06:53)

You can follow along with the slides during this segment.

To follow along with the slides, note the time indices at the end of each bullet point. When the time on the podcast reaches the index listed at the end of a given bullet point, it is time to switch to the next bullet point (with space). The slides should work in any Javascript-enabled browser.

Segment 2 (52:58)

The Compliance Guide has since been made available since the talk was recorded. (53:56).

Tags: bkuhn, karen, sflc, gplv3, compliance

March 17, 2009

Episode 0x09: Karen F. Copenhaver

Summary

In this episode of the Software Freedom Law Show, Karen and Bradley interview Karen F. Copenhaver of the Linux Foundation and Choate, Hall, & Stewart, LLP, and also answer a listener's question.

This show was released on Tuesday 17 March 2009; its running time is 00:42:51.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:31)

• Karen (Sandler) just returned from speaking at the Bossa Conference 2009. (00:50)
• Bradley just returned from the Free Software Poker Conference. (01:13)
• Outside of his work for the Conservancy and the SFLC, Bradley also contributes to the Pokersource project. (01:27)
• Karen (Sandler) mentioned a type of non-profit organization called trade associations, aka 501(c)(6)'s. (02:50)
• Karen (Copenhaver) works for the Linux Foundation. (03:52)

Segment 1 (04:09)

• Karen (Copenhaver) noted that she thinks of Richard Fontana as a national treasure. Fontana was previously a guest (on episode 0x04). (09:40)
• Karen (Copenhaver) mentioned that conversations among lawyers about Free Software licensing issues are very important. Listeners may be interested to know about open-bar, which is a mailing list for exactly that. (15:26)
• Karen (Copenhaver) pointed out that Scott Peterson is an invaluable resource to other lawyers. Scott was previously a guest (on episode 0x01). (16:17)
• Karen (Copenhaver) pointed out that she isn't the attorney for any kernel developers or the member companies of the Linux Foundation, and that her primary role is for education on legal issues related to the kernel named Linux. (17:32)
• Both Karens discussed the differences between trade associations (aka 501(c)(6)'s), and 501(c)(3) charitable organizations. The latter is more common in the FLOSS world, but Linux Foundation is the former. Stormy Peters wrote an excellent blog post on the differences between the two. (18:50)
• Karen (Copenhaver) pointed out that The Open Source Development Labs (OSDL) was the predecessor organization to the Linux Foundation. (Linux Foundation was formed by the merger the ODSL and the Free Standards Group (FSG) in early 2007.) (20:40)
• Some of the key kernel developers, such as Andrew Morton, Linus Torvalds, and Ted T'so work for the Linux Foundation. (21:20)
• Karen (Copenhaver) said that the Linux Foundation has a small number of employees, although at ten, it is actually about the same size, or, in most cases, bigger more than most non-profits in the FLOSS space. She was likely primarily comparing the size of the Linux Foundation to its member companies. (22:25)
• Jim Zemlin is the CEO of the Linux Foundation. (24:54)
• The Linux Foundation has planned a number of events for 2009. (31:15)

Segment 2 (34:06)

• The FSF FAQ as a pretty good definition of license Compatibility. (37:00)
• The the license compatibility matrix is also in the GPL FAQ. The matrix was written by Brett Smith, who was a guest on Episode 0x02.(38:19)
• The FSF License List indicates whether or not each license is compatible with the GPL. (40:00)

Tags: bkuhn, karen, linux foundation, Karen Copenhaver, license compatibility

March 3, 2009

Episode 0x08: Selecting a FLOSS License

Summary

Bradley and Karen discuss the issues and considerations for a FLOSS project selecting a license.

This show was released on Tuesday 3 March 2009; its running time is 00:40:30.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:25)

• Bradley mentioned license proliferation. (02:50)
• Karen mentioned the FSF License List. (04:40)
• Although they are saying it too fast, Bradley and Karen are saying the word “Affero”, referring to the Affero GPL. (06:50)
• Bradley and Karen discussed weak copyleft, such as the Lesser GPL. (16:00)
• Bradley mentioned this blog post of his where he says most developers have traditionally seen a licensing decision as something you think about once and never revisit!. (22:35)
• Karen mentioned the SFLC Primer.
• Bradley mentioned checking if a license is on the FSF License List, on the OSI License List and if it's DFSG-Free before using it. (27:21)

Segment 1 (28:15)

Karen and Bradley debate various issues about license selection.

Tags: bkuhn, karen, fsf, gplv3, agpl, patents, copyrights, trademarks

February 17, 2009

Episode 0x07: Van Lindberg

Summary

In this episode of the Software Freedom Law Show, Bradley and Karen interview Van Lindberg of the law firm, Haynes and Boone. The discussion centers around explaining the difference between copyrights, patents and trademarks to Free Software developers.

This show was released on Tuesday 17 February 2009; its running time is 00:40:18.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:28)

• Unlike our previous guests Scott and Richard, Van is an external, or outside counsel, who are lawyers hired by the company or organization that advise it from the outside. External lawyers are often employees of law firms, as Van is. (02:07)

Segment 1 (03:47)

Interview with Van Lindberg.

• Van is an associate at a law firm called Haynes and Boone (04:15).
• The term we don't like that Bradley keeps referring to is “intellectual property”, which has often been criticized by people in the Software Freedom world, initially in the writings of Richard Stallman. (12:29)
• Karen asked if Van is a patent lawyer. “Patent lawyers” are lawyers who are the member of the bar in some state, and have also taken a special exam to allow them to practice before the United States Patent Office. “Patent agents” are non-lawyers who have taken the same exam and can also practice before the United States Patent Office. Practicing before the patent office is unique in the USA, as you can do so without going to law school and passing a state-level bar exam. (13:30)
• Van's book is Intellectual Property and Open Source, published by O'Reilly. (36:50)

Tags: bkuhn, karen, lindberg, patents, copyrights, trademarks

February 3, 2009

Episode 0x06: An Exception(al) Podcast

Summary

In this episode, Karen and Bradley discuss the issue of licensing exceptions: texts written that give additional permissions beyond the standard permissions that come automatically with existing FLOSS licenses.

This show was released on Tuesday 3 February 2009; its running time is 00:39:57.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:45)

• Bradley mentioned the FSF approved license list and the OSI approved license list. (02:23)
• Bradley mentioned the concept of license proliferation, and explained how the issue of exceptions is orthogonal to it. (03:08)
• Bradley mentioned the horribleness of Visual Basic. (04:47)
• The Wikipedia entry on the GPL linking exception is not completely accurate, but it's a pretty good introduction.
• Bradley and Karen discussed in detail Section 7 of GPLv3, which discusses the “Additional Permissions” possibilities (16:15)
• Bradley compared the possibility of representing any Free Software licenses as GPLv3 plus additional permissions to the representing all programs as Turing machines or with Gödel numbering. (18:30)
• Bradley mentioned the LGPLv3. (22:35, 37:37)

Segment 1 (23:44)

• SFLC's announcement for the GCC Runtime Library Exception; Bradley mentioned his blog post about it. (24:15)
• Bradley spoke about the intermediate representation used by the compiler. (27:34)
• The text of the GCC Runtime Library Exception, and the FAQ. (32:45)

Tags: bkuhn, karen, gplv3, exceptions

January 20, 2009

Episode 0x05: Eben Moglen on Origins of Copyright and Patents

Summary

In a speech recorded in December 2008, Eben Moglen speaks about the origins of copyright and patents from a historical perspective.

This show was released on Tuesday 20 January 2009; its running time is 00:54:50.

Show Notes

This episode features a recording of Eben Moglen's keynote, entitled Collaborative Innovation for Development: Enlarging the Global Commons at the Knowledge Commons' Collaborative Innovation for Development conference on Enlarging the Global Commons in New Delhi, India on 6 December 2008.

In the speech, Eben discusses in depth the origins of the copyright and patent system, and how Free Software interacts with that history.

Tags: sflc, moglen

January 6, 2009

Episode 0x04: Lawyers Who Wear Fedoras

Summary

Richard Fontana, Open Source Licensing and Patent Counsel from Red Hat, joins us for an in-depth interview.

This show was released on Tuesday 6 January 2009; its running time is 00:33:52.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:43)

• Bradley mentioned that the Fedora Project is sponsored by Red Hat, where Richard Fontana works. (01:50)
• Fontana was involved in the GPLv3 Process.

Segment 1 (11:58)

Interview with Richard Fontana.

• Fontana mentioned “intellectual property” Boutique law firms. (08:52)
• Fontana mentioned the historical concerns in the Free Software community about the term “intellectual property”, such as those raised by RMS. (09:00)
• Fontana mentioned how the SCO vs. IBM lawsuit drew much attention to the intersection of legal issues and Free Software. (13:39)
• Fontana helped draft the various rationale documents during the GPLv3 drafting process.

Tags: bkuhn, karen, gplv3, fontana, red hat

December 23, 2008

Episode 0x03: With Software As a Service, Is Only the Network Luddite Free?

Summary

This episode of the Software Freedom Law Show is a recording of Bradley's speech on network service software freedom, a keynote from the 2008 Plone Conference.

This show was released on Tuesday 23 December 2008; its running time is 00:31:38.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:20)

Bradley made a quick reference to a Saturday Night Live skit that included Steve Martin.

Segment 1 (04:30)

The slides from the talk are available online and you can follow along. The numbers after each bullet point is the time index when you should hit the space bar to move onto the next point or slide.

Tags: bkuhn, agpl

December 9, 2008

Episode 0x02: Getting to Know the FSF

Summary

In this episode of the Software Freedom Law Show, Bradley and Karen interview Brett Smith, the Licensing Compliance Engineer at the Free Software Foundation.

This show was released on Tuesday 9 December 2008; its running time is 00:30:57.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:26)

• Bradley mentioned that the FSF is the one of the oldest non-profit organizations in the Free Software space. The FSF was founded on 4 October 1985. (01:25)
• Karen and Bradley mentioned the GPLv3 Process.

Segment 1 (03:42)

• Both Bradley and Brett used to order CD's from Cheap Bytes in the 1990s, which Bradley was amazed to learn is still in business today. (04:37)
• Bradley and Brett used to run Fedora when it was still called Red Hat. (04:47)
• We believe Brett was referring to RMS' lecture at KTH in Sweden on 30 October 1986, which inspired Brett to get involved with Free Software. (05:03)
• Brett and Bradley meet at the Cincinnati GNU/Linux Users' Group. (06:45)
• Brett mentioned David “novalis” Turner who used to work at the FSF in the position Brett now holds.
• Brett mentioned the GPL Compliance Lab at the FSF. (08:25)
• Brett mentioned the Affero GPL. (09:35)
• Bradley mentioned his blog post about the “Eternal September” of GPL compliance. (10:45)
• Brett keeps a Compliance case stats box on the FSF Licensing page. (11:36)
• We spoke a few times about the GPL FAQ, which includes info about other FSF-published licenses as well. (08:15, 12:30).
• Brett mentioned RMS' essay on why to upgrade to GPLv3. (14:35)
• Brett's Quick Guide to GPLv3 discusses some of the changes in GPLv3, including ones discussed on the podcast. (16:00)
• We discussed GPLv3's anti-DRM provision for User Products, at the end of Section 6. (16:03)
• We discussed GPLv3's Termination Provision. (17:12)
• We discussed GPLv3's Additional Terms provisions, which allows for Apache license compatibility. (19:11)
• Brett briefly mentioned GPLv3's patent provisions. (21:41)
• Brett mentioned the GNU Simplified Free Documentation License, for which the drafting process is ongoing. (23:18)
• Brett mentioned the FSF's release of the FDL version 1.3. RMS has written in detail about it since our recording took place. Bradley also made a blog post about it. (23:37)
• Brett and Bradley discussed how old and ground-breaking the FDL was. FDL was first released in March 2000. Bradley didn't have a chance to tell his story as to why the first version was 1.1; maybe he will sometime. :)

Tags: bkuhn, karen, fsf, gplv3, agpl, smith

November 25, 2008

Episode 0x01: The Engineer and the Lawyer

Summary

In this episode of the Software Freedom Law Show, Bradley and Karen discuss the differences and similarities of software developers / engineers and lawyers. They also interview their first guest, Scott K. Peterson, Senior Counsel at HP.

This show was released on Tuesday 25 November 2008; its running time is 00:40:24.

Show Notes

Segment 0 (00:43)

• Bradley and Karen recall the episode numbering debate raised on the first show. (00:56)
• Karen argues that saying Episode 1 makes it sound like the Star Wars movie. (01:08)
• Bradley and Karen like Star Trek. Bradley thinks that ST:DS9 was the best series. Karen likes Patrick Stewart.
• Bradley said the phrase high-order calculus, which was confusing. He was probably thinking of first order predicate calculus, which he studied in graduate school, but he was actually trying to make reference to the fact that Karen studied more complex calculus applications such as differential equations and multivariable calculus. (02:05)
• Cooper Union, which provides full scholarships to all of its students, doesn't have liberal arts majors.
• Karen talked about how engineering school can be good preparation for legal writing and for law school, generally. Apparently, physics and math majors score higher on the LSAT. (04:36)
• Many contracts and/or licenses contain a list of definitions that indicate how certain terms should be interpreted. See section 0 of the GNU General Public License (GPL), version 3 for an example. (04:54)
• Bradley compared those defined terms in licenses to the #define's in the C preprocessor. (05:52)
• A statute is a law passed by any legislative body. As the statute is the “letter of the law”, it is usually the first thing lawyers look at when determining what the law is and its application. Interestingly, statutes are also often referred to by lawyers as code. (09:20)
• Dicta (plural of dictum) are statements contained in a court's decision that are explanatory and not necessarily part of the legal rationale or doctrine of the decision. (09:50)

Segment 1 (11:58)

Interview with Scott Peterson.

• Scott attended MIT as an undergraduate.
• Scott mentioned the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, and in particular Section 510(k), which regulates medical devices. (12:50)
• Scott is an “inside counsel”, sometimes called “in-house counsel” at HP. (13:35) In-house lawyers are employees of the company or organization as opposed to external counsel, who are lawyers hired by the company or organization that advise it from the outside. External lawyers are often employees of law firms.
• Scott mentioned Apollo Computer, which became a division of HP in 1989. (14:18)
• Scott participated in the GPLv3 Process (19:56) on Committee B. (21:11)
• Scott compared the GPLv3 process to standard setting performed by standards bodies.
• Scott mentioned that he's a patent attorney. People who practice patent law before the United States Patent and Trademark Office must have a technical background (usually an undergraduate degree in science or engineering). You actually don't have to go to law school to do that; non-lawyers with the appropriate technical educational background can take the “patent bar” exam and become a “patent agent”. (33:25)
• Scott mentioned the “claims” of the patent. Those unfamiliar with how a patent is structured might want to read the discussion on this in SFLC's Legal Guide. (34:05)
• Discussion of the Bilski decision:
• The Bilski decision heavily referenced the State Street decision (35:13)
• SFLC published a comment on the Bilksi decision. (35:30)
• Karen mentioned our colleague Dan Ravicher. (37:48)
• Bradley mentioned that some of the judges dissenting in Bilski were very pro-software-patent. (38:48)

Tags: bkuhn, karen, hp, peterson

November 11, 2008

Episode 0x00: Introducing the Software Freedom Law Show

Summary

The Software Freedom Law Center is proud to announce its new podcast, The Software Freedom Law Show. Hosted by Bradley M. Kuhn and Karen Sandler, this bi-weekly podcast will bring interviews and explanations on legal issues related to Free, Libre and Open Software Software (FLOSS).

Our first episode introduces the format and the hosts interview each other so you can get to know them better.

This show was released on Tuesday 11 November 2008; its running time is 00:32:39.

Show Notes

Our first episode introduces the format and the hosts.

Segment 0 (at 00:23)

• Numbering of the Episode
  • Dijkstra's article, Why numbering should start at zero.(00:49)
  • Karen mentioned the Zeroth law of Thermodynamics (00:52)
  • Bradley referred to the laws of robotics, to which Asimov added a Zeroth Law in his later books (making the law the first in priority of application, if not first in order of appearance). (00:52)
  • Bradley is a “Podcast Monitor”, not a “Hall monitor”. (01:30)
• SFLC
• An article announcing the founding of SFLC in March 2005 (02:43).
• The team of SFLC (04:50)
• Karen mentioned attorney client privilege which may be a term unfamiliar to our hacker listeners. (07:16)
• We mentioned that SFLC (and Conservancy) are each 501(c)(3) charities in the USA. (07:37)
• If your not-for-profit FLOSS project needs legal help, write to <help@softwarefreedom.org>.
• Software Freedom Conservancy
• An article that announced formation of the Conservancy.
• Karen mentioned that Conservancy helps projects handle their Google Summer of Code funds. (08:46)
• A discussion of umbrella organizations is contained in SFLC's legal primer. (12:11)
• Conservancy's Board of Directors is different from SFLC's, since they are separate organizations. (15:13)
• If your not-for-profit FLOSS project is looking for a non-profit, incorporate organizational home, write to <conservancy@softwarefreedom.org>.

Segment 1 (at 16:17)

• For the curious: NYC Noise Ordinance regarding emergency vehicles. (16:30)
• Hiawatha Bray often called the FSF Cambridge-based, as he did in this article about the SCO law suit. (17:20)
• Bradley's first Unix system was an AT&T 3B2/600. It ran System V R3, which didn't have streams (the SYSV equivalent to sockets). (18:18)
• The vi Lovers homepage says it's pronounced “vee eye”. Bradley doesn't love vi, so he'll go back to saying “vye”. (18:40)
• Bradley couldn't find a good web page that discussed the full history of Backspace vs. DEL in Emacs, but the Emacs Wiki hints at the controversy. (19:30)
• Bradley briefly mentioned the Xemacs fork. (19:40)
• Bradley mentioned The GNU Manifesto. (20:07)
• Bradley probably had his dates mixed up of his first GNU/Linux install. 0.99pl12 came out in early 1993, so he probably installed SLS in early 1993 during his sophomore year in college. He found his Xconfig file from his old laptop with a filedate of 15 December 1993. (Remember when you had to write Xconfigs by hand and they would break your monitor if you did it wrong?) (20:44)
• Bradley mentioned helping RMS start the license list. Here's the earliest known web archived version and its modern decendent. (21:28)
• Bradley stopped using Quicken in 2000 in favor of Gnucash, but he actually uses Ledger now. (22:30)
• Karen indicates Fortan is still relevant, and the Wikipedia entry seems to agree. (24:21)
• Chairman of SFLC's Board, and its Director-Counsel, Eben Moglen, is also a law professor at Columbia University, and was Karen's professor in Law School. (25:28)
• Karen mentioned doing a “Choose your own essay” program in C for Eben when she was law school, based on the idea of Choose Your Own Adventure books, which both Karen and Bradley read as children. (25:43)
• Bradley mentioned Eben and Larry Wall both being influenced by APL. Bradley is sure, although it doesn't seem to appear in the transcripts, that during one of his early State of the Onion speeches, Larry joked that he'd use Unicode Perl operators to reinvent APL. (26:20)
• Bradley mentioned his Master's thesis and the Parrot project. (26:42)
• We mentioned that law school is extremely expensive. (27:50)

Trackbacks

(Done by hand, currently. ;)

• Our producer, Dan Lynch, blogged about the start of the show, and also started a thread in the Linux Outlaws forum.

Tags: bkuhn, karen, numbering, fsf, sflc, conservancy