Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Posted Jul 1, 2021 21:48 UTC (Thu) by bkuhn (subscriber, #58642)In reply to: Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights by madscientist
Parent article: Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
I also generally think giving a sense of how much time is spent by the org and explaining the strategy is more important and useful than raw numbers of violation reports and open matters and closed matters. The most important reason for that is that often, a single large successful enforcement action against a powerful company, or a lawsuit, quickly changes behavior of many other companies in a period of just a few months. To use an example that's old enough that it's easy to talk about the details: So, if you look back to the history of enforcement (let's consider the BusyBox enforcement in the late 2000s that Conservancy did), I suspect you'd see a huge spike in violation reports over a period of 2004-2008, yielding 100s of active reports, but Conservancy was at the time working on only about 15-20 of those matters. Then we filed the lawsuit, and then we saw lots of really good compliance come about, even among companies that weren't sued (because they realized the stakes were real and didn't want to be sued next). So, if you read a stats snapshot that right before Conservancy's lawsuit in early 2009, you'd see hundreds of pending violation reports and Conservancy working only 17 of them. You'd probably have said seeing those numbers at that time that we were doing a bad job! But, we were carefully curating a list of defendants that were the right mix to file the suit, which we then leveraged to assure others who weren't sued came into compliance.
It's no secret that GPL enforcement is grossly underfunded, and that means leverage must be used to assure compliance. If we had 10x the resources for enforcement, absolutely there are other great strategies that would be possible.
Posted Jul 2, 2021 0:52 UTC (Fri)
by pabs (subscriber, #43278)
[Link]
For the violations I have seen, there have been both BSD and GPL violations, on Linux based routers, mostly violating Linux/busybox/samba. In addition, during my work on the Debian derivatives census I saw violations on the entirety of a typical Debian based distribution.
Posted Jul 2, 2021 8:16 UTC (Fri)
by fredrik (subscriber, #232)
[Link] (8 responses)
Granted, funding for copyright violations may primarily come from grants from organizations who are better informed. Still, publicity drives awareness.
So, here's another vote for collecting and regularly publishing reports about the number of violations found overall. Isn't that something the SF Conservancy could do? Add to that the number of hours/staff spent by the Conservancy during that period and you'd have something newsworthy enough for a spot on the LWN feed, at least on a quarterly basis.
Posted Jul 2, 2021 23:32 UTC (Fri)
by JanC_ (guest, #34940)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Jul 3, 2021 9:09 UTC (Sat)
by fredrik (subscriber, #232)
[Link]
Still, I agree that collecting and publishing the data may consume precious time for the Conservancy. On the other hand, whoever does it would have to have some level of both credibility and notability, otherwise the work may not be known and few will provide those necessary external incident reports. A bit of chicken and egg problem.
Posted Jul 3, 2021 16:58 UTC (Sat)
by Trelane (subscriber, #56877)
[Link] (1 responses)
A regular count of "incidents we couldn't pursue due to lack of money/staffing/other" would be interesting to find interested in donating but unsure of the impact is their donations.
Posted Jul 7, 2021 18:01 UTC (Wed)
by JanC_ (guest, #34940)
[Link]
Posted Jul 15, 2021 22:20 UTC (Thu)
by mrugiero (guest, #153040)
[Link]
Posted Jul 3, 2021 2:15 UTC (Sat)
by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Jul 4, 2021 0:44 UTC (Sun)
by pabs (subscriber, #43278)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jul 4, 2021 0:57 UTC (Sun)
by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389)
[Link]
Posted Jul 2, 2021 22:45 UTC (Fri)
by ceplm (subscriber, #41334)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Jul 2, 2021 23:29 UTC (Fri)
by JanC_ (guest, #34940)
[Link]
Posted Jul 3, 2021 0:48 UTC (Sat)
by pabs (subscriber, #43278)
[Link]
Posted Jul 17, 2021 12:27 UTC (Sat)
by fgrosshans (guest, #35486)
[Link]
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
FWIW, they didn't do it out of greed or anything, it just wasn't worth it because the application was to niche and the clients non-technical: the modified code wouldn't have been of any use to anyone outside the company.
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
Kuhn: It Matters Who Owns Your Copylefted Copyrights
