Changeset - 0f3bc95c5160
[Not reviewed]
0 1 0
Bradley Kuhn (bkuhn) - 10 years ago 2014-03-20 12:01:17
bkuhn@ebb.org
Rework pasted text into a coherent description of system library exception.

This required writing a lot of additional text to make it work.

I also added my cheeky rule of thumb. :)
1 file changed with 43 insertions and 24 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
gpl-lgpl.tex
Show inline comments
...
 
@@ -2463,30 +2463,49 @@ never be required to provide more than that.  One always has the right to
 
modify a source code work by deleting any part of it, and there can be no
 
requirement that free software source code be a whole functioning program.
 

	
 
% FIXME: Standard Interface
 

	
 
% FIXME: System Libraries: it's in a different place and changed in later drafts
 

	
 
The final paragraph of section 1 revises the exception to the source code
 
distribution requirement in GPLv2 that we have sometimes called the system
 
library exception. This exception has been read to prohibit certain
 
distribution arrangements that we consider reasonable and have not sought to
 
prevent, such as distribution of gcc linked with a non-free C library that is
 
included as part of a larger non-free system. This is not to say that such
 
non-free libraries are legitimate; rather, preventing free software from
 
linking with these libraries would hurt free software more than it would hurt
 
proprietary software.
 

	
 
As revised, the exception has two parts. Part (a) rewords the GPLv2
 
exception for clarity but also removes the words ``unless that
 
component itself accompanies the executable.''  By itself, (a) would
 
be too permissive, allowing distributors to evade their
 
responsibilities under the GPL.  We have therefore added part (b) to
 
specify when a system library that is an adjunct of a major essential
 
operating system component, compiler, or interpreter does not trigger
 
the requirement to distribute source code.  The more low-level the
 
functionality provided by the library, the more likely it is to be
 
qualified for this exception.
 
\section{The System Library Exception}
 

	
 
The previous section skipped over one part of the CCS definition, the
 
so-called system library exception.  The ``System Libraries'' definition (and
 
the ``Standard Interface'' and ``Major Component'' definitions, which it
 
includes) are designed as part
 

	
 
to permit certain distribution arrangements that are considered reasonable by
 
copyleft advocates.  The system library exception is designed to allow
 
copylefted software to link with these libraries when such linking would hurt
 
software freedom more than it would hurt proprietary software.
 

	
 
The system library exception has two parts.  Part (a) rewords the GPLv2
 
exception for clarity replaces GPLv2's words ``unless that component itself
 
accompanies the executable'' with ``which is not part of the Major
 
Component''.  The goal here is to not require disclosure of source code of
 
certain libraries, such as necessary Microsoft Windows DLLs (which aren't
 
part of Windows' kernel but accompany it) that are required for functioning
 
of copylefted programs compiled for Windows.
 

	
 
However, in isolation, (a) would be too permissive, as it would sometimes
 
allowing distributors to evade important GPL requirements.  Part (b) reigns
 
in (a).  Specifically, (b) specifies only a few functionalities that a the
 
system library may provide and still qualify for the exception.  The goal is
 
to ensure system libraries are truly adjunct to a major essential operating
 
system component, compiler, or interpreter.  The more low-level the
 
functionality provided by the library, the more likely it is to be qualified
 
for this exception.
 

	
 
Admittedly, the system library exception is a frequently discussed topic of
 
obsessed GPL theorists.  The amount that has been written on the system
 
library exception (both the GPLv2 and GPLv3 versions of it), if included
 
herein,  could easily increase this section of the tutorial to a length
 
greater than all the others.
 

	
 
Like any exception to the copyleft requirements of GPL, would-be GPL
 
violators frequently look to the system library exception as a potential
 
software freedom circumvention technique.  When considering whether or not a
 
library qualifies for the system library exception, here is a pragmatic
 
thesis to consider, based on the combined decades of experience in GPL
 
interpretation of this tutorial's authors: the harder and more strained the
 
reader must study and read the system library exception, the more likely it
 
is that the library in question does not qualify for it.
 

	
 
% FIXME: These don't belong here
 

	
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)