[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/philosophy enforcing-gpl.pt-br.html po/enfo...
|
From: |
GNUN |
|
Subject: |
www/philosophy enforcing-gpl.pt-br.html po/enfo... |
|
Date: |
Thu, 2 Dec 2021 04:02:27 -0500 (EST) |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: GNUN <gnun> 21/12/02 04:02:27
Modified files:
philosophy : enforcing-gpl.pt-br.html
Added files:
philosophy/po : enforcing-gpl.pt-br-diff.html
Log message:
Automatic update by GNUnited Nations.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.pt-br.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.13&r2=1.14
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/enforcing-gpl.pt-br-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
Patches:
Index: enforcing-gpl.pt-br.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.pt-br.html,v
retrieving revision 1.13
retrieving revision 1.14
diff -u -b -r1.13 -r1.14
--- enforcing-gpl.pt-br.html 5 Sep 2021 08:35:41 -0000 1.13
+++ enforcing-gpl.pt-br.html 2 Dec 2021 09:02:25 -0000 1.14
@@ -1,4 +1,9 @@
-<!--#set var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.en.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="/philosophy/po/enforcing-gpl.pt-br.po">
+ https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/enforcing-gpl.pt-br.po</a>'
+ --><!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html"
+ --><!--#set var="DIFF_FILE"
value="/philosophy/po/enforcing-gpl.pt-br-diff.html"
+ --><!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2021-10-03" --><!--#set
var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.en.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.pt-br.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 -->
@@ -13,6 +18,7 @@
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.pt-br.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.pt-br.html" -->
<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.pt-br.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.pt-br.html" -->
<div class="article reduced-width">
<h2>Fazendo Valer a GNU GPL</h2>
@@ -260,7 +266,7 @@
<p class="unprintable"><!-- timestamp start -->
Ãltima atualização:
-$Date: 2021/09/05 08:35:41 $
+$Date: 2021/12/02 09:02:25 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: po/enforcing-gpl.pt-br-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/enforcing-gpl.pt-br-diff.html
diff -N po/enforcing-gpl.pt-br-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/enforcing-gpl.pt-br-diff.html 2 Dec 2021 09:02:27 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,261 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 -->
+<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html -->
+<!--#set var="TAGS" value="essays licensing copyleft" -->
+<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" -->
+<title>Enforcing the GNU GPL
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/enforcing-gpl.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
+<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
+<div class="article reduced-width">
+<h2>Enforcing the GNU GPL</h2>
+
+<address class="byline">by <a
href="http://moglen.law.columbia.edu/">Eben
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong>Moglen</a> <a</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em>Moglen</a> <a</em></ins></span>
href="#moglen"><sup>[*]</sup></a></address>
+
+<p><em>10 September 2001</em></p>
+
+<p>Microsoft's anti-GPL offensive this summer has sparked renewed
+speculation about whether the GPL is “enforceable.” This
+particular example of “FUD” (fear, uncertainty and doubt)
+is always a little amusing to me. I'm the only lawyer on earth who
+can say this, I suppose, but it makes me wonder what everyone's
+wondering about: Enforcing the <a
href="/licenses/gpl.html">GPL</a> is
+something that I do all the time.</p>
+
+<p>Because <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">free
software</a> is an
+unorthodox concept in contemporary society, people tend to assume that
+such an atypical goal must be pursued using unusually ingenious, and
+therefore fragile, legal machinery. But the assumption is faulty. The
+goal of the Free Software Foundation in designing and publishing the GPL,
+<em>is</em> unfortunately unusual: we're reshaping how programs
are made in
+order to give everyone the right to understand, repair, improve, and
+redistribute the best-quality software on earth. This is a transformative
+enterprise; it shows how in the new, networked society traditional ways of
+doing business can be displaced by completely different models of
+production and distribution. But the GPL, the legal device that makes
+everything else possible, is a very robust machine precisely because it is
+made of the simplest working parts.</p>
+
+<p>The essence of copyright law, like other systems of property rules,
is the
+power to exclude. The copyright holder is legally empowered to exclude
+all others from copying, distributing, and making derivative works.</p>
+
+<p>This right to exclude implies an equally large power to
+license—that is, to grant permission to do what would otherwise
+be forbidden. Licenses are not contracts: the work's user is obliged
+to remain within the bounds of the license not because she voluntarily
+promised, but because she doesn't have any right to act at all except
+as the license permits.</p>
+
+<p>But most proprietary software companies want more power than copyright
+alone gives them. These companies say their software is
+“licensed” to consumers, but the license contains
+obligations that copyright law knows nothing about. Software you're
+not allowed to understand, for example, often requires you to agree
+not to decompile it. Copyright law doesn't prohibit decompilation,
+the prohibition is just a contract term you agree to as a condition of
+getting the software when you buy the product under shrink wrap in a
+store, or accept a “clickwrap license” on line. Copyright
+is just leverage for taking even more away from users.</p>
+
+<p>The GPL, on the other hand, subtracts from copyright rather than
adding to
+it. The license doesn't have to be complicated, because we try to control
+users as little as possible. Copyright grants publishers power to forbid
+users to exercise rights to copy, modify, and distribute that we believe
+all users should have; the GPL thus relaxes almost all the restrictions of
+the copyright system. The only thing we absolutely require is that anyone
+distributing GPL'd works or works made from GPL'd works distribute in turn
+under GPL. That condition is a very minor restriction, from the copyright
+point of view. Much more restrictive licenses are routinely held
+enforceable: every license involved in every single copyright lawsuit is
+more restrictive than the GPL.</p>
+
+<p>Because there's nothing complex or controversial about the license's
+substantive provisions, I have never even seen a serious argument that the
+GPL exceeds a licensor's powers. But it is sometimes said that the GPL
+can't be enforced because users haven't “accepted” it.</p>
+
+<p>This claim is based on a misunderstanding. The license does not
require
+anyone to accept it in order to acquire, install, use, inspect, or even
+experimentally modify GPL'd software. All of those activities are either
+forbidden or controlled by proprietary software firms, so they require you
+to accept a license, including contractual provisions outside the reach of
+copyright, before you can use their works. The free software movement
+thinks all those activities are rights, which all users ought to have; we
+don't even <em>want</em> to cover those activities by license.
Almost
+everyone who uses GPL'd software from day to day needs no license, and
+accepts none. The GPL only obliges you if you distribute software made
+from GPL'd code, and only needs to be accepted when redistribution occurs.
+And because no one can ever redistribute without a license, we can safely
+presume that anyone redistributing GPL'd software intended to accept the
+GPL. After all, the GPL requires each copy of covered software to include
+the license text, so everyone is fully informed.</p>
+
+<p>Despite the FUD, as a copyright license the GPL is absolutely solid.
+That's why I've been able to enforce it dozens of times over nearly ten
+years, without ever going to court.</p>
+
+<p>Meanwhile, much murmuring has been going on in recent months to the
+supposed effect that the absence of judicial enforcement, in US or other
+courts, somehow demonstrates that there is something wrong with the GPL,
+that its unusual policy goal is implemented in a technically indefensible
+way, or that the Free Software Foundation, which authors the license, is
+afraid of testing it in court. Precisely the reverse is true. We do not
+find ourselves taking the GPL to court because no one has yet been willing
+to risk contesting it with us there.</p>
+
+<p>So what happens when the GPL is violated? With software for which the
+Free Software Foundation holds the copyright (either because we wrote
+the programs in the first place, or because free software authors have
+assigned us the copyright, in order to take advantage of our expertise
+in protecting their software's
+freedom), <a href="/licenses/gpl-violation.html">the first step is a
+report</a>, usually received by email
+to <a
href="mailto:license-violation@gnu.org"><license-violation@gnu.org></a>.
+<a href="/licenses/gpl-violation.html">We ask the reporters of
+violations to help us establish necessary facts</a>, and then we
+conduct whatever further investigation is required.</p>
+
+<p>We reach this stage dozens of times a year. A quiet initial contact
is
+usually sufficient to resolve the problem. Parties thought they were
+complying with GPL, and are pleased to follow advice on the correction of
+an error. Sometimes, however, we believe that confidence-building
+measures will be required, because the scale of the violation or its
+persistence in time makes mere voluntary compliance insufficient. In such
+situations we work with organizations to establish GPL-compliance programs
+within their enterprises, led by senior managers who report to us, and
+directly to their enterprises' managing boards, regularly. In
+particularly complex cases, we have sometimes insisted upon measures that
+would make subsequent judicial enforcement simple and rapid in the event
+of future violation.</p>
+
+<p>In approximately a decade of enforcing the GPL, I have never insisted
on
+payment of damages to the Foundation for violation of the license, and I
+have rarely required public admission of wrongdoing. Our position has
+always been that compliance with the license, and security for future good
+behavior, are the most important goals. We have done everything to make
+it easy for violators to comply, and we have offered oblivion with respect
+to past faults.</p>
+
+<p>In the early years of the free software movement, this was probably
the
+only strategy available. Expensive and burdensome litigation might have
+destroyed the FSF, or at least prevented it from doing what we knew was
+necessary to make the free software movement the permanent force in
+reshaping the software industry that it has now become. Over time,
+however, we persisted in our approach to license enforcement not because
+we had to, but because it worked. An entire industry grew up around free
+software, all of whose participants understood the overwhelming importance
+of the GPL—no one wanted to be seen as the villain who stole free
+software, and no one wanted to be the customer, business partner, or even
+employee of such a bad actor. Faced with a choice between compliance
+without publicity or a campaign of bad publicity and a litigation battle
+they could not win, violators chose not to play it the hard way.</p>
+
+<p>We have even, once or twice, faced enterprises which, under US
+copyright law, were engaged in deliberate, criminal copyright
+infringement: taking the source code of GPL'd software, recompiling it
+with an attempt to conceal its origin, and offering it for sale as a
+proprietary product. I have assisted free software developers other
+than the FSF to deal with such problems, which we have
+resolved—since the criminal infringer would not voluntarily
+desist and, in the cases I have in mind, legal technicalities
+prevented actual criminal prosecution of the violators—by
+talking to redistributors and potential customers. “Why would
+you want to pay serious money,” we have asked, “for
+software that infringes our license and will bog you down in complex
+legal problems, when you can have the real thing for free?”
+Customers have never failed to see the pertinence of the question.
+The stealing of free software is one place where, indeed, crime
+doesn't pay.</p>
+
+<p>But perhaps we have succeeded too well. If I had used the courts to
+enforce the GPL years ago, Microsoft's whispering would now be falling
+on deaf ears. Just this month I have been working on a couple of
+moderately sticky situations. “Look,” I say, “at
+how many people all over the world are pressuring me to enforce the
+GPL in court, just to prove I can. I really need to make an example
+of someone. Would you like to volunteer?”</p>
+
+<p>Someday someone will. But that someone's customers are going to go
+elsewhere, talented technologists who don't want their own reputations
+associated with such an enterprise will quit, and bad publicity will
+smother them. And that's all before we even walk into court. The first
+person who tries it will certainly wish he hadn't. Our way of doing law
+has been as unusual as our way of doing software, but that's just the
+point. Free software matters because it turns out that the different way
+is the right way after all.</p>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong></div></strong></del></span>
+
+<div class="infobox extra" role="complementary">
+<hr />
+<p id="moglen">[*]
+Eben Moglen is professor of law and legal history at Columbia University
+Law School. He serves without fee as General Counsel of the Free Software
+Foundation.
+</p>
+</div>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em></div></em></ins></span>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer" role="contentinfo">
+<div class="unprintable">
+
+<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to <a
+href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. There are also
<a
+href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF. Broken links and
other
+corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a
+href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p>
+
+<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+ replace it with the translation of these two:
+
+ We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+ translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+ Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+ to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
+ <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p>
+
+ <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations
of
+ our web pages, see <a
+ href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+ README</a>. -->
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
README</a> for
+information on coordinating and contributing translations of this
article.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Copyright © 2001 Eben Moglen</p>
+
+<p>Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted
in
+any medium, provided this notice is preserved.</p>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2021/12/02 09:02:27 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
| [Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- www/philosophy enforcing-gpl.pt-br.html po/enfo...,
GNUN <=