Misplaced Pages

Open Software License

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
#457542

65-693: The Open Software License ( OSL ) is a software license created by Lawrence Rosen . The Open Source Initiative (OSI) has certified it as an open-source license , but the Debian project judged version 1.1 to be incompatible with the DFSG . The OSL is a copyleft license, with a termination clause triggered by filing a lawsuit alleging patent infringement. Many people in the free software and open-source community feel that software patents are harmful to software, and are particularly harmful to open-source software . The OSL attempts to counteract that by creating

130-411: A trade secret and concealed by such methods as non-disclosure agreements . Software copyright has been recognized since the mid-1970s and is vested in the company that makes the software, not the employees or contractors who wrote it. The tendency to license proprietary software , rather than sell it, dates from the time period before the existence, then the scope of software copyright protection

195-488: A web store . FSF offers speakers and seminars for pay, and all FSF projects accept donations. Revenues fund free-software programs and campaigns, while cash is invested conservatively in socially responsible investing . The financial strategy is designed to maintain the Foundation's long-term future through economic stability. The FSF is a tax-exempt organization and posts annual IRS Form 990 filings online. Through

260-497: A "Respects Your Freedom" (RYF) hardware certification program. To be granted certification, a product must use 100% Free Software, allow user installation of modified software, be free of backdoors and conform with several other requirements. The FSF's board of directors includes professors at leading universities, senior engineers, and founders. Current board members are: Previous board members include: Executive directors include: The FSF Articles of Organization state that

325-403: A case can be brought to court by an involved party as a breach of contract . United States and French courts have tried cases under both interpretations. More than 90 percent of companies use open-source software as a component of their proprietary software. The decision to use open-source software, or even engage with open-source projects to improve existing open-source software, is typically

390-515: A cross-claim or counterclaim, against Licensor or any licensee alleging that the Original Work infringes a patent. This termination provision shall not apply for an action alleging patent infringement by combinations of the Original Work with other software or hardware. Another goal of the OSL is to warrant provenance. 7) Warranty of Provenance and Disclaimer of Warranty. Licensor warrants that

455-630: A free smartphone operating system and creating replacements for Skype and Siri . Previous projects highlighted as needing work included the Free Java implementations , GNU Classpath , and GNU Compiler for Java , which ensure compatibility for the Java part of OpenOffice.org , and the GNOME desktop environment (see Java: Licensing ). The effort has been criticized by Michael Larabel for either not instigating active development or for being slow at

520-597: A lawsuit against Cisco for using GPL-licensed components shipped with Linksys products. Cisco was notified of the licensing issue in 2003 but Cisco repeatedly disregarded its obligations under the GPL. In May 2009, Cisco and FSF reached settlement under which Cisco agreed to make a monetary donation to the FSF and appoint a Free Software Director to conduct continuous reviews of the company's license compliance practices. In September 2019, Richard Stallman resigned as president of

585-407: A number of key characteristics: The Open Source Initiative vets and approves new open-source licenses that comply with its Open Source Definition . Outside of software, noncommercial-only Creative Commons licenses have become popular among some artists who wish to prevent others from profiting excessively from their work. However, software that is made available for noncommercial use only

650-430: A pay-per-usage or subscription basis, although other revenue models such as freemium are also used. For customers, the advantages of temporary licenses include reduced upfront cost, increased flexibility, and lower overall cost compared to a perpetual license. In some cases, the steep one-time cost demanded by sellers of traditional software were out of the reach of smaller businesses , but pay-per-use SaaS models makes

715-423: A pool of software which a user can use if that user does not harm it by attacking it with a patent lawsuit. The OSL has a termination clause intended to dissuade users from filing patent infringement lawsuits: 10) Termination for Patent Action. This License shall terminate automatically and You may no longer exercise any of the rights granted to You by this License as of the date You commence an action, including

SECTION 10

#1732801335458

780-544: A pragmatic business decision. When proprietary software is in direct competition with an open-source alternative, research has found conflicting results on the effect of the competition on the proprietary product's price and quality. For decades, some companies have made servicing of an open-source software product for enterprise users as their business model. These companies control an open-source software product, and instead of charging for licensing or use, charge for improvements, integration, and other servicing. Software as

845-525: A result, linking an unchanged Original Work with another independently-written work does not, absent more, create a Derivative Work subject to § 1(b); such an act is merely the incorporation of a copy of that Original Work into a collective work, authorized by § 1(a). The OSL is intended to be similar to the LGPL . Note that the definition of Derivative Works in the OSL does not cover linking to OSL software/libraries so software that merely links to OSL software

910-445: A service (SaaS) products based on open-source components are increasingly common. Open-source software is preferred for scientific applications, because it increases transparency and aids in the validation and acceptance of scientific results. Free Software Foundation The Free Software Foundation ( FSF ) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization founded by Richard Stallman on October 4, 1985. The organisation supports

975-426: A sign of agreement. As a result of the end of physical constraints, length increased. Most EULAs have been designed so that it is very difficult to read and understand them, but easy to agree to the licensing terms without reading them. Regardless of how easy it is to access, very few consumers read any part of the license agreement. Most assume the terms are unobjectionable or barely notice agreeing while installing

1040-518: A verbatim copy of the license. Software license A software license is a legal instrument governing the use or redistribution of software. Since the 1970s, software copyright has been recognized in the United States. Despite the copyright being recognized, most companies prefer to sell licenses rather than copies of the software because it enables them to enforce stricter terms on redistribution. Very few purchasers read any part of

1105-523: Is not subject to the OSL license. The OSL is not compatible with the GPL . It has been claimed that the OSL is intended to be legally stronger than the GPL (with the main difference "making the software available for use over the Internet requires making the source code available" that is the same goal as the even newer GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL), that is compatible with GPLv3), however, unlike

1170-574: Is a fundamental difference between speaking out against policies or actions and smear campaigns", and "that if one is taking an ethical position, it is justified, and often necessary, to not only speak about the benefits of freedom but against acts of dispossession and disenfranchisement." In 2009, a license update of LibDWG/ LibreDWG to version 3 of the GNU GPL made it impossible for the free software projects LibreCAD and FreeCAD to use LibreDWG legally. Many projects voiced their unhappiness about

1235-473: Is a list of software packages that have been verified as free software. Each package entry contains up to 47 pieces of information such as the project's homepage, developers, programming language, etc. The goals are to provide a search engine for free software, and to provide a cross-reference for users to check if a package has been verified as being free software. The FSF has received a small amount of funding from UNESCO for this project. FSF maintains many of

1300-436: Is a type of free license that mandates derivative works to be licensed. The other types of free license lack this requirement: for permissive licenses , attribution is typically the only requirement, and public-domain-equivalent licenses have no restrictions. The proliferation of open-source licenses has compounded license compatibility issues, but all share some features: allowing redistribution and derivative works under

1365-475: Is no copyright claim, but code acquired under any almost any set of terms cannot be waved to the public domain. Permissive licenses can be used within copyleft works, but copyleft material cannot be released under a permissive license. Some weak copyleft licenses can be used under the GPL and are said to be GPL-compatible. GPL software can only be used under the GPL or AGPL. Free and open-source software licenses have been successfully enforced in civil court since

SECTION 20

#1732801335458

1430-501: Is not considered open source. Sun Microsystems ' noncommercial-only Java Research License was rejected by the open-source community, and in 2006 the company released most of Java under the GPL. Since 1989, a variety of open-source licenses for software have been created. Choosing an open-source software license has grown increasingly difficult due to the proliferation of licenses , many of which are only trivially distinct. Many licenses are incompatible with each other, hampering

1495-485: Is solicited. Eben Moglen and Dan Ravicher previously served individually as pro bono legal counsel to the FSF. After forming the Software Freedom Law Center , Eben Moglen continued to serve as the FSF's general counsel until 2016. Most of the FSF funding comes from patrons and members. Revenue streams also come from free-software-related compliance labs, job postings, published works, and

1560-480: The GNU Project and its employees and volunteers have mostly worked on legal and structural issues for the free software movement and the free software community . Consistent with its goals, the FSF aims to use only free software on its own computers. The Free Software Foundation was founded in 1985 as a non-profit corporation supporting free software development. It continued existing GNU projects such as

1625-520: The board of directors are elected. The bylaws say who can vote for them. The board can grant powers to the Voting Membership. At any given time, there are usually around a dozen employees. Most, but not all, worked at the FSF headquarters in Boston, Massachusetts until August 2024 when the FSF closed its offices and switched to remote work. On November 25, 2002, the FSF launched

1690-518: The free software community 's attention". The FSF considers these projects "important because computer users are continually being seduced into using non-free software , because there is no adequate free replacement." As of 2021, high-priority tasks include reverse engineering proprietary firmware, reversible debugging in GNU Debugger ; developing automatic transcription and video editing software, Coreboot , drivers for network routers ,

1755-466: The free software movement , with the organization's preference for software being distributed under copyleft ("share alike") terms, such as with its own GNU General Public License . The FSF was incorporated in Boston, Massachusetts , United States, where it is also based. From its founding until the mid-1990s, FSF's funds were mostly used to employ software developers to write free software for

1820-468: The Advancement of Free Software " and " Free Software Award for Projects of Social Benefit " The LibrePlanet wiki organizes FSF members into regional groups in order to promote free software activism against digital restrictions management and other issues promoted by the FSF. The FSF maintains a list of "high-priority projects" to which the Foundation claims that "there is a vital need to draw

1885-547: The FOSS community is whether open-source licenses are "bare licenses" or contracts . A bare license is a set of conditions under which actions otherwise restricted by intellectual property laws are permitted. Under the bare license interpretation, advocated by the Free Software Foundation (FSF), a case is brought to court by the copyright holder as copyright infringement . Under the contract interpretation,

1950-556: The FSF Associate Membership program for individuals. Bradley M. Kuhn (FSF executive director, 2001–2005) launched the program and also signed up as the first Associate Member Associate members are primarily an honorary and funding support role. In 2023, associate members gained the ability to make board nominations, along with FSF staff and FSF voting members. There is also an annual meeting of FSF members, usually during lunch at LibrePlanet, in which feedback for FSF

2015-544: The FSF after pressure from journalists and members of the open source community in response to him making controversial comments in defense of Marvin Minsky on Jeffrey Epstein 's sex trafficking scandal. Nevertheless, Stallman remained head of the GNU Project and in 2021, he returned to the FSF board of directors. The original purpose of the FSF was to promote the ideals of free software. The organization envisaged

Open Software License - Misplaced Pages Continue

2080-526: The FSF and others have re-termed "digital restrictions management", as part of its effort to highlight technologies that are "designed to take away and limit your rights", ) and user interface copyright. Since 2012, Defective by Design is an FSF-initiated campaign against DRM. It also has a campaign to promote Ogg + Vorbis , a free alternative to proprietary formats like AAC and MQA . FSF also sponsors free software projects it deems "high-priority". " Outstanding new Free Software contributor ", " Award for

2145-879: The GNU operating system as an example of this. The GNU General Public License (GPL) is a widely used license for free software projects. The current version (version 3) was released in June 2007. The FSF has also published the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL), the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), and the GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL). The FSF's publishing department, responsible for "publishing affordable books on computer science using freely distributable licenses." This

2210-604: The GPL, the OSL has never been tested in court and is not widely used. The restriction contained in Section 9 of the OSL reads: If You distribute or communicate copies of the Original Work or a Derivative Work, You must make a reasonable effort under the circumstances to obtain the express assent of recipients to the terms of this License. In its analysis of the OSL the Free Software Foundation claims that "this requirement means that distributing OSL software on ordinary FTP sites, sending patches to ordinary mailing lists, or storing

2275-426: The Original Work or a Derivative Work as a distribution under section 1(c). OSL in section 1(a) authorizes licensees to reproduce covered software "as part of a collective work," as distinct from the Original Work or a Derivative Work. In section 1(c), only Derivate Works or copies of the Original Work are made subject to the license, not collective works. Derivative Work is defined in section 1(b) as being created when

2340-527: The adoption and promotion of free software. From 2003 to 2005, FSF held legal seminars to explain the GPL and the surrounding law. Usually taught by Bradley M. Kuhn and Daniel Ravicher , these seminars offered CLE credit and were the first effort to give formal legal education on the GPL. In 2007, the FSF published the third version of the GNU General Public License after significant outside input. In December 2008, FSF filed

2405-480: The company to maximize revenue. Traditionally, software was distributed in the form of binary object code that could not be understood or modified by the user, but could be downloaded and run. The user bought a perpetual license to use a particular version of the software. Software as service (SaaS) vendors—who have the majority market share in application software as of 2023 —rarely offer perpetual licenses. SaaS licenses are usually temporary and charged on

2470-507: The copyright in and to the Original Work and the patent rights granted herein by Licensor are owned by the Licensor or are sublicensed to You under the terms of this License with the permission of the contributor(s) of those copyrights and patent rights. OSL explicitly states that its provisions cover derivative works even when they are distributed only through online applications: 5) External Deployment. The term "External Deployment" means

2535-541: The documents that define the free software movement. FSF hosts software development projects on its Savannah website. An abbreviation for "Hardware-Node", the h-node website lists hardware and device drivers that have been verified as compatible with free software. It is user-edited and volunteer supported with hardware entries tested by users before publication. FSF sponsors a number of campaigns against what it perceives as dangers to software freedom, including software patents , digital rights management (which

2600-436: The extent that they do not breach reasonable consumer expectations. The gap between expectations and the content of EULAs is especially wide when it comes to restrictions on copying and transferring ownership of digital content. Many EULAs contain stipulations that are likely unenforceable depending on the jurisdiction. Software vendors keep these unenforceable provisions in the agreements, perhaps because users rarely resort to

2665-501: The goals of the free software movement. Translation issues, ambiguity in licensing terms, and incompatibility of some licenses with the law in certain jurisdictions compounds the problem. Although downloading an open-source module is quick and easy, complying with the licensing terms can be more difficult. The amount of software dependencies means that engineers working on complex projects must often rely on software license management software in order to help them achieve compliance with

Open Software License - Misplaced Pages Continue

2730-417: The holder of these copyrights, it has authority to enforce the copyleft requirements of the GNU General Public License (GPL) when copyright infringement occurs. From 1991 until 2001, GPL enforcement was done informally, usually by Stallman himself, often with assistance from FSF's lawyer, Eben Moglen . Typically, GPL violations during this time were cleared up by short email exchanges between Stallman and

2795-474: The legal system to challenge them. Service-level agreements are often used for enterprise software and guarantee a level of service, such as software performance or time to respond to issue raised by the customer. Many stipulate financial penalties if the service falls short of the agreed standard. SLAs often cover such aspects as availability, reliability, price, and security using quantifiable metrics. Multi-tier SLAs are common in cloud computing because of

2860-591: The license itself. Linus Torvalds has criticized FSF for using GPLv3 as a weapon in the fight against DRM. Torvalds argues that the issue of DRM and that of a software license should be treated as two separate issues. On June 16, 2010, Joe Brockmeier, a journalist at Linux Magazine , criticized the Defective by Design campaign by the FSF as "negative" and "juvenile" and not being adequate for providing users with "credible alternatives" to proprietary software. FSF responded to this criticism by saying "that there

2925-405: The license, initially shrink-wrap contracts and now most commonly encountered as clickwrap or browsewrap . The enforceability of this kind of license is a matter of controversy and is limited in some jurisdictions. Service-level agreements are another type of software license where the vendor agrees to provide a level of service to the purchaser, often backed by financial penalties. Copyleft

2990-426: The licensee exercise their ability "to translate, adapt, alter, transform, modify, or arrange the Original Work." Rosen has written: The verbs used in § 1(b) ["translate, adapt, alter, transform, modify, or arrange"] reflect the kinds of activities that we generally do to create derivative literary or other expressive works, and those things—not functional linking—create Derivative Works as defined in this license. As

3055-402: The licensing terms of open-source components. Many open-source software files do not unambiguously state the license, increasing the difficulties of compliance. When combining code bases, the original licenses can be maintained for separate components, and the larger work released under a compatible license. This compatibility is often one-way. Public domain content can be used anywhere as there

3120-442: The manifest assent of their licensees, so this OSL 3.0 requirement is not intended to require something different than what now happens in ordinary software distribution practice." If the FSF claim is true then the main difference between the GPL and OSL concerns possible restrictions on redistribution. Both licenses impose a kind of reciprocity condition requiring authors of extensions to the software to license those extensions with

3185-461: The mid-2000s. Courts have found that distributing software indicates acceptance of the license's terms. However, developers typically achieve compliance without lawsuits. Social pressures , such as the potential for community backlash, are often sufficient. Cease and desist letters are a common method to bring companies back into compliance, especially in Germany. A long-debated subject within

3250-590: The prototypical contract where both parties fully understand the terms and agree of their own free will. There has been substantial debate on to what extent the agreements can be considered binding. Before 1996 in the United States, clickwrap or browsewrap licenses were not held to be binding, but since then they often have been. Under the New Digital Content Directive effective in the European Union, EULAs are only enforceable to

3315-453: The respective license of the original work. The patent action termination clause, described above, is a further significant difference between the OSL and GPL. It is optional, though common for the copyright holder to add “or any later version” to the distribution terms in order to allow distribution under future versions of the license. This term is not directly mentioned in the OSL. However, it would seem to violate section 16, which requires

SECTION 50

#1732801335458

3380-479: The sale of manuals and tapes , and employed developers of the free software system. Since then, it has continued these activities, as well as advocating for the free software movement. The FSF is also the steward of several free software licenses, meaning it publishes them and has the ability to make revisions as needed. The FSF holds the copyrights on many pieces of the GNU system, such as GNU Compiler Collection . As

3445-434: The same license, unrestricted access to the source code , and nondiscrimination between different uses—in particular, allowing commercial use. The source code (or compiled binaries in the form of object code ) of a computer program is protected by copyright law that vests the owner with the exclusive right to copy the code. The underlying ideas or algorithms are not protected by copyright law, but are often treated as

3510-445: The software affordable. Initially, end-user license agreements (EULAs) were printed on either the shrinkwrap packaging encasing the product (see shrink-wrap contract ) or a piece of paper. The license often stipulated that a customer agreed if they did not return the product within a specified interval. More recently, EULAs are most commonly found as clickwrap or browsewrap where the user's clicks or continued browsing are taken as

3575-445: The software in an ordinary version control system, can arguably be a violation of the license and would subject violators to possible termination of the license. Thus, the OSL makes it challenging to develop software using the ordinary tools of Free Software development." Rosen contradicts this, stating in an explanation of his license that "most open source projects and commercial distributors already use appropriate procedures to obtain

3640-410: The software. Companies take advantage of consumers' inattention to insert provisions into EULAs. Proprietary software is usually offered under a restrictive license that bans copying and reuse and often limits the purchaser to using the software on one computer. Source code is rarely available. Derivative software works and reverse engineering are usually explicitly prohibited. Many EULAs allow

3705-447: The use of different computing services that may be managed by different companies. SLAs in cloud computing are an area under active research as of 2024 . Before the open-source movement in the 1980s, almost all software was proprietary and did not disclose its source code . Open-source licensing is intended to maximize openness and minimize barriers to software use, dissemination, and follow-on innovation. Open-source licenses share

3770-425: The use, distribution, or communication of the Original Work or Derivative Works in any way such that the Original Work or Derivative Works may be used by anyone other than You, whether those works are distributed or communicated to those persons or made available as an application intended for use over a network. As an express condition for the grants of license hereunder, You must treat any External Deployment by You of

3835-401: The vendor to change the terms at any time and the customer must choose between agreeing or ceasing use of the product, without getting a refund. It is common for EULAs to allow unilateral termination by the vendor for any number of vague reasons or none at all. EULAs, almost always offered on a take-it-or-leave-it basis as a non-negotiable condition for using the software, are very far from

3900-435: The vendor to collect information about the user and use it in unrestricted ways. Some EULAs restrict the ability of users to exercise copyright over derivative work made using the software, such as creative creations in the virtual worlds of video games . Most disclaim any liability for harms caused by the product, and prevent the purchaser from accessing the court system to seek a remedy. Furthermore, many EULAs allow

3965-550: The violator. In the interest of promoting copyleft assertiveness by software companies to the level that the FSF was already doing, in 2004 Harald Welte launched gpl-violations.org . In late 2001, Bradley M. Kuhn (then executive director), with the assistance of Moglen, David Turner, and Peter T. Brown , formalized these efforts into FSF's GPL Compliance Labs. From 2002–2004, high-profile GPL enforcement cases, such as those against Linksys and OpenTV, became frequent. GPL enforcement and educational campaigns on GPL compliance

SECTION 60

#1732801335458

4030-410: The work being done, even after certain projects were added to the list. The FSF maintains a list of approved Linux operating systems that maintain free software by default: The project also maintains a list of operating systems that are not versions of the GNU system: The following are previously endorsed operating systems that are no longer actively maintained : Since 2012, the FSF maintains

4095-406: The years the FSF has had its postal address, and until August 31st 2024 when going all remote its physical headquarters, at different locations in Boston , Massachusetts , USA , as indicated in the table below. As the GNU GPL v2 included the FSF's postal address in one of the first lines of the introduction and the source code license notice template every change of address also caused updates to

4160-406: Was clear . These licenses have continued in use after software copyright was recognized in the courts, and are considered to grant the company extra protection compared to copyright law. According to United States federal law , a company can restrict the parties to which it sells but it cannot prevent a buyer from reselling the product. Software licensing agreements usually prohibit resale, enabling

4225-422: Was a major focus of the FSF's efforts during this period. In March 2003, SCO filed suit against IBM alleging that IBM's contributions to various free software, including FSF's GNU, violated SCO's rights. While FSF was never a party to the lawsuit, FSF was subpoenaed on November 5, 2003. During 2003 and 2004, FSF put substantial advocacy effort into responding to the lawsuit and quelling its negative impact on

#457542