[Discuss] Ubiquiti Networks is creatively violating the GPL

[greg at freephile.com (Greg Rundlett (freephile))]

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 3:57 AM, Bill Bogstad <bogstad at pobox.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Greg Rundlett (freephile)
> <greg at freephile.com> wrote:
> > I contacted Riley to see if he's brought this to the FSF or Software
> > Freedom Conservancy for help.
> >
> > It's good to ask people politely to comply with the law; and good to out
> > them when they persistently refuse.
>
> I agree with this, but if you have been following the news related to
> VMware being  sued in Germany; you will know that a company will
> string you along forever if they feel it is in their best interest to
> not comply.  One big problem with getting companies to comply is that
> only the copyright holder can actually sue.   An end user has no legal
> standing to bring suit as they are not a party to any contract/license
> between the offender and the copyright holder.  In many cases, that
> would mean that an individual is personally responsible for finding
> and paying a lawyer in order to bring suit.   In the VMware case, the
> Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC) is helping to fund the case; but
> isn't legally a party to it.   That is why I think it is so important
> to fund organizations like FSF or the SFC.   Without them, enforcing
> GPL would be a David and Goliath battle.  David may have won in the
> Bible, but in real life that doesn't happen so often.



You're correct Bill.  In this case FSF can't help because they're not the
copyright owner.  The SFC "might" be able to help on behalf of the
copyright holder, and Riley is trying to put these two together.


> Also,  I don't
> know if it is deliberate or not; but the FSF in the early days
> required copyright assignment in order to accept contributions and I
> think that puts them in a much better position to actually enforce the
> GPL against  the inevitable violators.
>

FSF prefers copyright assignment for works that are part of  the GNU
system, such as GCC (https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html).  However
apparently not all software that is dubbed "GNU" is FSF Copyrighted --
meaning some works are copyright by individual authors.

Assignment of copyright (to the FSF) is NOT automatic.  It's something you
have to do (another hurdle in making software free, AND defensible).


> On the other hand, copyrights in the Linux kernel are generally held
> either by individuals or by for profit corporations.   Individuals
> typically don't have the resources to enforce their copyright and
> corporations have an odd relationship with the GPL.  They like access
> to the code, but get worried when people start enforcing the GPL.
> What if someone comes after them at some point?   People from the SFC
> have publicly stated that they are a bit worried about donations from
> corporations drying up as a result of this.   Hopefully that won't
> happen, but if it does I'm not sure the community will step up to fill
> the gap.   Unfortunately, we can't depend on organizations like The
> Linux Foundation to engage in enforcement activities.  They are
> a industry trade association.   Essentially bought and paid for by
> corporations.   VMware is
> even a member.
>
>
The SFC (Karen Sandler) appealed for financial support (donations),
describing how very important their work (
https://sfconservancy.org/members/services/) is at LibrePlanet 2015.

More info on Copyright Assignment to FSF:

Brief explanation by Eben Moglen
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html
Longer description from 2014
https://www.fsf.org/bulletin/2014/spring/copyright-assignment-at-the-fsf
Instructions
https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Copyright-Papers.html
Actual templates
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/tree/doc/Copyright