From 1c59a2545b64c86f2bef2150c3fb824269813efb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Harald Welte Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 02:15:50 +0200 Subject: abstract for japan --- 2016/open-compliance-jp/abstract.txt | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+) create mode 100644 2016/open-compliance-jp/abstract.txt (limited to '2016/open-compliance-jp') 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. -- cgit v1.2.3