Top > Webmaster > 2007 > January > 2007-01-08

Debate Spurs over GNU General Public License Version 3

The GNU General Public License (GPL), a widely used free software license originally written by Richard Stallman, has entered into much debate. The latest version of the license, version 2, was released in 1991. Now, as work is on its way on the license`s version 3 (GPLv3), much debate has spurred regarding the digital rights management (DRM) and patent provisions. The GPL grants the recipients of a computer program the rights of the free software definition and uses copyleft to ensure the freedoms are preserved, even when the work is altered.
By some measures, the GPL is the single most popular license for free and open source software. As of April 2004, the GPL accounted for nearly 75% of the 23,479 free-software projects listed on Freshmeat, and about 68% of the projects listed on SourceForge.

GPLv3, scheduled for final release next year, tries to address license proliferation, a serous issue in the free and open source software (FOSS) community. Many organizations use "stacks", combinations of free and open source solutions, which renders the continuity of licensing imperative. There are a numerous number licenses for Vendors and other FOSS members to choose from with this list continuing to grow rapidly despite worries regarding the dangers of license proliferation. Dana Gardner, Interarbor Solutions` Principal Analyst, defined the problem: "Technology has allowed more and more picking and choosing of components and using open standards like Web services to integrate. But with the variety of licenses, the simplicity can be subverted by licensing and copyright issues."

The nedd for a standard license in the industry is imperative. The main goal of the GPLv3 is to achieve this end by presenting a single approach to licensing. This was one of the main topics of discussion in last month`s LinuxWorld in the UK. Whether GPLv3 can achieve this goal is uncertain with many doubting if this could ever happen. "It`s easier to be a monopoly," Gardner sums it up. "It`s harder to be democratic and egalitarian about it. That`s why it`s going to take some time."