Everyone wishes that free software licences were shorter. The good
news from
the GPLv3 process
is that by changing the LGPL from being a whole licence to being an
additional permission that can accompany the GPL, the LGPL has
shrunk drastically and the proposed GPL and LGPL texts, combined,
are shorter than the current GPL and LGPL combined. But GPLv3
itself will indeed be longer than version 2 is.
Additional words are necessary to protect against additional
problems, to ensure it works the same across national boundaries,
and to clarify the meaning of the licence. Since FSF started
soliciting comments in January 2006 about how to improve the GPL,
there have been few or no suggestions as to how it could be
significantly shortened.
But longer doesn't have to mean more complex. GPLv3 is simpler in
some ways, and I'd like to describe how it was made simpler so that
maybe some people can see other parts of the licence that those same
principles can be applied to.
-
Clarity of wording: When something is not defined, the reader will
have to check their local laws to see what happens in undefined
cases. For example, "distribution" was undefined in
GPLv2, but re-labelled as "conveying" in v3 to avoid
clashing with existing definitions of "distribution" in
local laws, and it has been defined. This should make it easier to
comply with the licence.
-
Clarity of intent: Similarly, GPLv3 adds words to clarify what is
intended to happen in new circumstances, such as described in the
recent piece I
wrote on
GPLv3 and the EUCD/DMCA.
-
Labelling: Each section in v3 has a descriptive title, unlike
version 2 where each section only had a number. This just makes it
easier to find what you're looking for.
-
Layout: All related things should be grouped together, and each
clause should be in the section you'd most expect it to be in.
The number of words needed to ensure that software users had
the four
freedoms in the 1970s was zero. There were no software patents,
no DMCA/EUCD laws, software generally came with source code, and
there was generally nothing limiting a person from redistributing
software.
As software distributors started blocking these freedoms by legal
and technical means, it became necessary for software that was
intended to come with those freedoms to be accompanied by licences
granting those freedoms and requiring others to pass them on when
they pass on the software.
GPLv1, written in 1989, had 1,500 words. GPLv2 has 2,300 words.
Draft 2 of GPLv3 has 4,000 words. The most important implementation
detail is that it has to work in court, and this can't be
compromised for the sake of making a shorter text. But if you can
see ways to make it simpler, that would be very useful because it's
not only technology lawyers that have to read the GPL, it's software
developers and judges too.
--
Ciarán O'Riordan,
Support free software: Join FSFE's Fellowship
