path: root/2016
diff options
authorHarald Welte <>2016-09-30 02:15:50 +0200
committerHarald Welte <>2016-12-27 11:13:46 +0100
commit1c59a2545b64c86f2bef2150c3fb824269813efb (patch)
tree7892c04a3052a1aebecb32373e7c0ea9c09c792c /2016
parentc91fea6d73088cb9058c0cea8fa6a6d72e538717 (diff)
abstract for japan
Diffstat (limited to '2016')
1 files changed, 21 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/2016/open-compliance-jp/abstract.txt b/2016/open-compliance-jp/abstract.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..45178ed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2016/open-compliance-jp/abstract.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+Strategies in practical GPL enforcement
+Enforcement of copyleft licenses like the GNU GPL has always been a
+somewhat controversial topic. Some people are not in favor of
+enforcement at all (but then, why choose the GPL and not a permissive
+license?). Other people have less inhibitions in enforcing the
+license. But then this raises the next questions? Enforcement using
+which strategy? Enforcement using which methods? The Linux Kernel
+developer community has recently re-fueled that debate on the
+ksummit-discuss mailing list.
+Ultimately, most projects and developers are looking for the
+downstream developers and companies to participate in a collaborative
+development model. The copyleft principle is just a legal "hack" to
+codify some part of that based on copyright. As a result, license
+compliance is not an end in itself, but the very bare legal minimum of
+what needs to be done when engaging in (particularly
+corporate/commercial) re-use of Free Software.
+This talk will look at the different (GPL) license enforcement
+approaches and present their advantages and disadvantages.
personal git repositories of Harald Welte. Your mileage may vary