1. Fellowship meetings in Vienna and Berlin
2. Discussion about Free Software in Austrian schools started
3. First draft of GPLv3 presented
4. Microsoft still trying to avoid competition
1. Fellowship meetings in Vienna and Berlin
Matthias Kirschner organised the first Fellowship meeting in Berlin.
Bernhard Reiter, FSFE's coordinator for Germany, was there to inform
about FSFE's work. A good discussion evolved, and interest in more
regular meetings was clearly voiced.
In Vienna, Karin Kosina and Reinhard Müller had invited to the second
Austrian Fellowship meeting. There was a very good discussion about
Free Software in Austrian schools.
While it was decided to stick with bi-monthly meetings in Vienna,
Berlin might even see monthly meetings if enough volunteers are found
to help with the organisation. Upcoming Fellowship meetings will be
announced on the FSFE events page as usual:
http://www.fsfeurope.org/events/events.en.html
2. Discussion about Free Software in Austrian schools started
Most schools in Austria still use and teach mostly proprietary
software. While many schools show very good initiatives towards the
adaption of Free Software, there is still a long road ahead. The FSFE
has created a mailing list meant for general discussion about Free
Software in Education in Austria, without being focussed on a specific
project or type of school.
https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-at
3. First draft of GPLv3 presented
The MIT in Boston, USA, hosted the first international conference on
the GPLv3. Georg Greve, Stefano Maffulli and Ciaran O'Riordan
represented the FSFE on this event that marks the first milestone of
the way towards a new version of the world's most successful Free
Software license.
4. Microsoft still trying to avoid competition
In a press release, Microsoft announced licensing Windows Server
source code instead of specifications, claiming to thus meet the
requirements put before them by the European Commission. FSFE was once
again quick to explain how this announcement is a mere attempt to
distract from Microsofts non-compliance with the European Court order,
and a tactical ploy to endanger Free Software developers: after having
seen such Windows source code, a developer writing interoperable
software is potentially subject to copyright infringement lawsuits
brought about by Microsoft.
Several media, including the Wall Street Journal and the International
Herald Tribune, followed FSFE's explanations on this issue.
You can find a list of all FSF Europe newsletters on
http://www.fsfeurope.org/news/newsletter.en.html
Greetings
As you will notice, English is not my mother tongue and therefore i apologize
for my English.
My name is Jan Braunisch. I am a student from Sweden who is a big fan of Free
Software. Sadly I have not contributed code to any project but i have been
very active in helping other users of Free Software.
Today I had a discussion in an IRC-channel about the possibilities of Linux
being released under the coming GNU GPL v3.
I was told that Linux may only be distributed under the GPL v2 and i was told
to look at http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/1/25/273 where Linus Torvalds explains
that only GPL v2 may be used.
Because I thought this was very strange I decided to take a look at the source
code of Linux itself. This is what i discovered:
* Many of the files (about one third of the .c-files) contained the standard
text found in most GPL:ed programs and which can be found at the end of the
GPL as the recommended way of releasing a program under the GPL.
* Most files had only a copyright notice and nothing about the license used
for the software.
* The only thing in the root directory of the kernel source tree containing
anything about the licensing of the software was the COPYING file, which only
contained a copy of the GPL v2 along with these notes:
NOTE! This copyright does *not* cover user programs that use kernel
services by normal system calls - this is merely considered normal use
of the kernel, and does *not* fall under the heading of "derived work".
Also note that the GPL below is copyrighted by the Free Software
Foundation, but the instance of code that it refers to (the Linux
kernel) is copyrighted by me and others who actually wrote it.
Also note that the only valid version of the GPL as far as the kernel
is concerned is _this_ particular version of the license (ie v2, not
v2.2 or v3.x or whatever), unless explicitly otherwise stated.
the second note was added a few years ago only to clarify how the licensing of
Linux is to be understood, hence it should not be treated as anything other
than a note.
In my opinion, this is not a valid way to license software under the GPL.
Now i have two questions, and i would be extremely grateful if you could
answer them for me:
What rights do I have to use the source code in the kernel tree which has not
specified a license? Is it released under the GPL, is it in the Public Domain
or am I not allowed to do anything with it?
If the code is Free Software under the GPL, may I only use GPL v2 as Linus
says or am i allowed to use any version of the GPL if i want to redistribute
it, according to "If the Program does not specify a version number of this
License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software
Foundation." under section 9 of the GPL.
Best regards
Jan Braunisch
hi.
from may 4th - 7th 2006 in athens there will be the 4th european social
forum. about 40000 ppl who think that "another world is possible" will meet
there. i am thinking about organizing the following workshop/seminary there:
* the production of free software as a showcase for a new type of
economy: cooperation instead of capitalist competition.
or something along that lines. people who would be interested in
participating there could email me.
greetings from vienna,
mond.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
. Franz Schaefer GPG KeyID: CFA2F632
.. +43 699 106 14 590 +43 720502048 Fingerprint: 57C2 C0CC
... schaefer(a)mond.at 6F0A 54C7 0D88 D37E
... http://www.mond.at/ C17C CB16 CFA2 F632