Lessons Learned from ath5k:
Copyright Stewardship in the Linux Codebase

Why Revisit Past Licensing Arguments?

If not, are we condemned to repeat it? (05:10)
- Maybe. (05:40)
Can we improve legal infrastructure? (05:45)
- Probably. (06:03)
Because we can? (06:15)
- Definitely. (06:30)
Mostly: it’s as funny as any story we get. (06:40)
- Yes, we are that geeky about licensing and copyrights. (06:59)

Starts like many Free Software stories: (07:06)
A patch posted to a mailing list. (07:10)
- linux-wireless mailing list. (07:47)
- ports OpenBSD’s ar5k to Linux calling it “ath5k”. (09:35)
… and the BSD daemons descend. (09:50)
- over a USA holiday weekend. (10:21)

SFLC is legal counsel to the Linux Wireless Team (13:12)
- led by John Linville (Wireless Network Maintainer) (13:20)
SFLC assisted earlier to clear up other ambiguities. (15:14)
John and Luis Rodriguez contacted SFLC to answer allegations. (15:20)
And that’s where the “fun” begins… (15:33)

Some OpenBSD folks openly attack legal opinions of SFLC. (15:50)
- including some personal attacks. (16:58)
Claimed patch was “serious” copyright infringement. (17:20)
Argued changes made for ath5k were not copyrightable. (17:51)
SFLC entered “dispute negotiation” mode. (18:02)
- Looking for an amicable outcome that pleased both sides. (18:44)

They wanted patches back from Linux. (19:30)
- Linux Wireless willing to maintain the code under ISC. (19:40)
They wanted their developers credited in files. (20:35)

SFLC sought to show clearly Linux devs had acted responsibly. (21:10)
Provide educational publications with preventative tone. (21:35)
Three issues addressed (three papers): (21:46)
- Copyright eligibility. (23:54)
- Tutorial on proper GPL/permissive file maintenance. (26:03)
- Legacy history to ensure ISC-license on ath5k. (27:08)

Is Signed-Off-By enough? (27:51)
- Many developers don’t realize they are signing off technical and licensing. (29:10)
- Patch submitter often not copyright holder. (29:32)
“Dual License” confusion (30:00)
- Things can be left ISC and used inside copyleft work. (30:12)
Is Collaboration possible? (30:20)
- Yes, but licensing care must be taken. (31:40)
- We should encourage more of it. (33:46)
- In some areas, BSD guys are better reverse engineers. (34:07)

The three papers published by SFLC are available. (34:53)
help@softwarefreedom.org (35:34)
- LF doesn’t provide legal representation to kernel developers … (36:17)
- … but SFLC has already and can do more of it (36:22)

SFLC is a 501(c)(3) charity in the USA and accepts donations on its website.

This talk and the slides are:

These slides, this talk, and audio/video recordings thereof are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.