Leading items [LWN.net]

Closed betas and the GPL

Certain issues seem to come around over and over again. One of those, certainly, is that of closed beta tests of Linux distributions. Can a distributor run closed beta tests and still comply with the GPL? The straightforward answer is certainly "no." If you distribute GPL-licensed software to somebody else, you can not restrict their right to further distribute that software.

That does not stop distributors from doing closed beta tests, however. Corel did it. Caldera (oops...SCO Group...) has done it. Lindows has done it. And UnitedLinux is doing it. The closed beta period ends on September 23, at which point the UnitedLinux beta, with source, will be available to all. In the mean time, however, one might wonder how the current closed beta is being kept closed.

At the UnitedLinux press conference, FSF director Bradley Kuhn asked about the terms of the non-disclosure agreement that was signed by the beta testers. The UnitedLinux spokesperson evidently agreed to disclose those terms. To help them remember, Mr. Kuhn has sent out an open letter on behalf of the FSF asking them to follow through:

Even as you release your new product to the public, the past situation must be clarified. Not only does the community deserve to know, but I also believe it behooves you to put to rest and clarify the legal ambiguities that arise naturally from doing a "closed beta" of GPL'ed software.

It remains to be seen whether UnitedLinux violated the GPL, or whether it just picked a set of beta testers who, of their own will, chose not to distribute the UnitedLinux beta.

Closed betas will always raise this sort of issue however. They are also unnecessary. There are distributors, with MandrakeSoft and the Debian Project at the top of the list, who do all of their development and beta testing work in the open. In return, they get a wider pool of testers, the assistance of the free software development community, and the knowledge that they will not be accused of GPL violations. Distributions, too, are free software development projects; they benefit from frequent, public releases. Is it really worth the trouble to keep a Linux distribution under wraps?

Comments (8 posted)

Integrating intellectual property rights and development policy

The London-based Commission on Intellectual Property Rights has issued its final report on intellectual property law and developing countries. There is much to be found there in favor of free software and freedom of access to information in general. With regard to DMCA-like legislation, the report recommends:

Where suppliers of digital information or software attempt to restrict 'fair use' rights by contract provisions associated with the distribution of digital material, the relevant contract provision may be treated as void. Where the same restriction is attempted through technological means, measures to defeat the technological means of protection in such circumstances should not be regarded as illegal.

Concerning software for use in government:

Developing countries and their donor partners should review policies for procurement of computer software, with a view to ensuring that options for using low-cost and/or open-source software products are properly considered and their costs and benefits carefully evaluated. Developing countries should ensure that their national copyright laws permit the reverse engineering of computer software programmes beyond the requirements for inter-operability, consistent with the relevant IP treaties they have joined.

The full report covers a much wider range of topics, such as drugs, traditional knowledge, agriculture, etc. Reading the whole thing is a substantial commitment of time, but worth the trouble for those who are interested in these topics. Those wanting a rather shorter experience can read The Economist's coverage of the report.

Comments (none posted)

LWN status update

After a few quiet weeks, we actually have some news to report: we have finally been able to set up a new merchant account which will allow us to accept credit cards. Hopefully we'll have better luck with the new bank than with the old - which is still holding a portion of the donations from last July.

What this means is that, finally, we will be able to go forward with our subscription offering, at which point we will truly find out if there is enough support out there to keep LWN going on a sustainable basis. There is still some frantic code-bashing to be done; if all goes well, we should be able to start taking subscriptions next week. Next week's LWN Weekly Edition will be free to all readers; thereafter it will be available to subscribers only for an initial period (which will probably be one week).

On another front, our new mailing list mechanism is up and running. The first list is called "Notify;" it simply receives a message once a week when the new Weekly Edition is available. This list thus replaces our old lwn-notify list, which has been running since the beginning - almost five years ago. Other lists, mostly providing access to our content via email, will be available shortly (and mostly limited to subscribers). Mailing list subscriptions require a (free) LWN account, and can be controlled through the "MyAccount" link in the left column.

Thanks, yet again, for your support through this interesting period.

Comments (14 posted)

Page editor: Jonathan Corbet
Next page: Security>>