[Committee-d] Draft recommendation for section 5c

[Zak Greant]

Please beat this like a giant piñata - it still needs a good deal of  
redacting.

GPLv3 Section 5c
================
Protecting creators and ensuring that consumers know their rights.

Overview
++++++++
Section 5c's primary purpose is to protect and enable consumers of
GPL-licensed software. It does so by requiring notices of a specific
type on modified versions of GPL v3-licensed software. These notices
help ensure that recipients of the software know what rights they are
granted, as well as what terms and conditions apply to the software.

Additionally, section 5c notices provide important protection for
creators by helping to ensure that users know that the software is
without warranty and by disclosing the complete origin of modified
versions of the software.

These intents for section 5c is partially described in several parts of
the preamble:

"... you must show them these terms so they know their rights."
     --GPLv3 Discussion Draft 1, Preamble, Para. 4

"For the developers' and author's protection, the GPL clearly explains
that there is no warranty for this free software. If the software is
modified by someone else and passed on, the GPL ensures that recipients
are told that what they have is not the original, so that any problems
introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors'
reputations."
     --GPLv3 Discussion Draft 1, Preamble, Para. 6

Community Input
+++++++++++++++
The bulk of comments on section 5c requested additional clarity for the
section. Some small number (n) requested extensions to the clause.
Another small group of comments (n) suggested that 5c be struck. A few
comments focused on none of these things. See Appendix 3 for the
comments on the matter.

Affected Parties
----------------
When considering the affects of section 5c, it is important to consider
the various parties who are affected by the clause, including: the
original creator of the software, the copyright holder, any contributors
(including maintainers), those who modify the work, those who
redistribute modified versions of the software, those who sponsored some
or all of the work, those who study the work, those who run the work,
those who use the services (if any) provided by the work, and so on.

Additionally, it is also important to consider how many people make up
each group.  In the case of popular software, it is very likely that
those who "consume" the software, either by running it, using services
provided by the software or by studying the source code, are likely to
outnumber contributors by a factor of tens of thousands to one.

Of this larger set of groups, it also seems likely that the vast
majority of these people will not have the resources required to
investigate the license of the software that they use.

It is also important to consider the needs of users who access software
via screen readers, braille devices, etc.

Committee D Recommendations
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Progressive Recommendation
==========================
The current state of how the ideas behind 5c are implemented puts
additional burden on GPL software consumers, increases the complexity of
the license, and confuses software creators.

These issues can be ameliorated by:

* Making section 5c-type manditory for authors and modifiers. This will
   remove any confusion as to what the requirements are for creators, be
   they authors, contributors or modifiers. It will also ensure that
   software consumers will always be able to easily see what rights they
   have to GPL'd software.

* Clarifying the requirements of section 5c notices.

* Replacing the suggested notices portion of the "How to Apply These  
Terms
   to Your New Programs" with a notice referring to the new  
requirements.

* Modifying section 5c to refer to whatever the new section on these  
kinds
   of notices is called.

Suggested New Section
---------------------
... TDB - assuming that we don't all think this is insane.


Conservative Recommendation
===========================
Work to clarify section 5c.

* Section "How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs" should be
   updated in regards to notices of copyright, warranty and license.

Suggested Rewording
-------------------
Modified versions of the work must display appropriate and prominent
notices of copyright, warranty and license. The license notice must
state that the modified work may be distributed under these conditions
and tell the user how to view a copy of this License together with the
central list (if any) of other terms in accord with section 7.

If the modified work has interactive user interfaces, each interface
must display these notices. If the interface presents a list of user
commands or options, such as a menu, a command to display this
information must be prominent in the list.  Otherwise, the modified work
must display this information at startup--except in the case that the
Program has such interactive modes and does not display this information
at startup. An option that allows a user choose to suppress the display
of these notices is permitted, if the option is disabled by default.

General Recommendations
=======================
Support section 5c with various utilities and forms that are designed to
help reduce the administrative load of maintaining section 5c-like
notices.

Other Effects
=============
In addition to the stated intent, there are additional effects of the
license, both (likely) intended and unintended.

Intended Consequences
'''''''''''''''''''''
* Less work for consumers of the software: by helping ensure that
   consumers clearly know their rights to the software, section 5c helps
   ensure that users ....

Unintended Consequences
'''''''''''''''''''''''
* Various software organizations who engage in proprietary relicensing
   have - in conjunction with other tactics - broadly interpreted  
section
   5c, so as to encourage users to purchase proprietary software.

Side Effects
''''''''''''
* A consequence of the section 5c is that is front-loads some work for
   the software producer; that is, some work that is likely to be
   required by the software developer at some point in the stage of the
   distribution software is required to be done before distribution, in
   order for the software to be GPL v3 compliant.

   This is a small price to pay for the much greater certainty that a
   properly implemented 5c notice provides to all consumers of the
   software, be they modifiers, redistributors, service users or end
   consumers.

   Note: The case for service consumers having an opportunity to see
   section 5c notices seems fuzzy to me. --zak


Appendix 1: Section 5c Text
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
c) If the modified work has interactive user interfaces, each must
include a convenient feature that displays an appropriate
copyright notice, and tells the user that there is no warranty for
the program (or that you provide a warranty), that users may
redistribute the modified work under these conditions, and how to
view a copy of this License together with the central list (if any) of
other terms in accord with section 7. If the interface presents a
list of user commands or options, such as a menu, a command to
display this information must be prominent in the list.
Otherwise, the modified work must display this information at
startup--except in the case that the Program has such
interactive modes and does not display this information at
startup.

Appendix 2: Section 7 Text relevant to Section 5c
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
....
Unless the work also permits distribution under a previous version of
this License, all the other terms included in the work under this
section must be listed, together, in a central list in the work.
...

Appendix 3: Comments
+++++++++++++++++++++
See http://gplv3.fsf.org/rt/NoAuth/readsay.html?id=1061