 Thank you Well, when I was asked to give the closing keynote I thought well closing keynote is always difficult thing because Everybody's been quite busy for several days. We've all had tons of technical talks, tons of discussions and the brain tends to be somewhat overloaded and Now I'm supposed to give you an idea of what's ahead and that is a Difficult endeavor. I did some research and discovered that we have an very old and unerode tradition in our industry, if you will Which are predictions. So I picked some out like this one 1957 I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people and I can assure you that data processing That won't last out the year There's another one There's no reason anyone would want a computer in their home 1977 well Given that these were smart people Making these predictions I Do feel a little better Now any one of my own and then seeing how this will work out in the end Let me begin by talking about what gave the main name to this keynote which is gklv3 it's almost there and Considering the fact that we heard so many things about how it was controversial. I Would like to take a moment to point out What we did not hear Which is the fact that most of the changes that are in there were in fact But for most of them there was no problem no big discussion When it comes to the controversial changes, I believe that we are seeing essentially two main areas one is software paints which is our Eternal at least it seems that way right now Menace I think Simon called it a zombie That keeps coming back here in Europe indeed That is how it feels and Since we don't know whether that zombie will succeed in Europe and we know that exists in the u.s We need to do something about it. So there is a controversy in software patents Although the main controversy does not so much seem to be in what people want to achieve But rather in how to actually achieve it The main controversy is not about what we want to do It's more about how exactly do you have to write it so it does do that and That turns out to be not so trivial But to be honest, I personally am fairly confident that All the people involved in gklv3 will be able to find a solution to that issue The second point Has been labeled digital restrictions management DRM Well, there is indeed a controversy here Although a part of that controversy I have found to be based on this information Because people come up, but why do you want to forbid DRM on I don't know music Well while we think that is a bad idea That is not what gklv3 is about In fact, the free software is defined By the four freedoms and one of them means unlimited use for any purpose So no matter how misled we might consider a certain purpose It would go against our principles To forbid usage For certain purposes. So this is not what gklv3 does It does not say you cannot build a DRM system for music with the software The clause in gklv3 is much more specific in a different area It's about DRM on the software, which is generally implemented in hardware Richard likes to call this a Tivoization After the device that is sold in the US Much less in Europe the Tivo Which is a piece of hardware that people think they buy and they put in their homes to record TV Programs from the net or from air, but they get the data over the net and in fact the Tivo Has software in there. It's based on the Linux kernel The Tivo has software in there that says I report back the viewing habits Of the people who own me or own me To the company Now if somebody doesn't want to get spied upon They could in theory take that software and modify it so it doesn't spy upon them anymore and Run that instead, but in fact that box does not allow this It checks which software is running and it will only run the software that the company authorized to run on the hardware So while you think you own the hardware, you actually don't because you do not have the freedom to choose What you want to run on that hardware? And this is something that Seems to be more and more common We see indications that more people will be doing this in the future And it goes against what we believe Should be done should be possible Should be allowed we think people should have the freedom if they buy a piece of hardware to run the software that they want to run We believe this is an important fundamental freedom to have and we think just a couple of years into the future When computers become more and more omnipresent and we will have computers everywhere around us Even more than we do today and we already have computers everywhere at least that's how it seems These computers control our lives often down to very intimate details of our lives Who should have the power to decide what these computers do I? Believe it is the people That are actually affected by the computers and that believe That they own the computers these people should be the ones to decide what is running and I was discussing this earlier with Jeremy You know ultimately in a country like the u.s. All it would take is Just one big virus suite that takes out part of the u.s. Economy for a while You know that creates one massive hit and The client would indeed be in a way that the u.s. Legislate that you can only have DRM hardware that every hardware that you sell must support this To you know ensure that there can be no more virus damage in Germany there is a discussion about Allowing the government to tap into every machine Having a trojan That installs itself on machines of people that might or might not have done criminal activity and Spies upon them without them noticing with that kind of climate We indeed face the possibility that such hardware Might be forced upon us that there might not be a choice anymore at some point Which means we need to prevent this now and that is what gplv3 is about this clause in gplv3 to prevent that kind of scenario and I know that this is not uncontroversial I know that some people in this community also Think differently about that issue But I personally believe that ultimately the reasons for having this protection Are as wise and as far-sighted as Some of the other costs that were in gplv2 when it was written and That were controversial then The status of the gplv3 right now is that we are having a slightly late That is in part certainly owed to the deal between Microsoft and Novell that all of you I guess I've been reading about I will not go into this in detail now What I also want to tell you is that the next draft might be the last It's not clear where that will be But it could be and if everything runs perfectly might be actually so Calculate in that this might be the last draft that's coming out So in case you have not yet looked at it. I Would urge you to take a look at this now Because if you want to comment The time is running out So you can participate at gplv3.fsf.org That is where you should go that is where you should look for the current drafts That's where you should make your comments And if you want to make comments make them now because the next draft might be the last one So now look let's look a little bit beyond What is actually you know the drafting process What will happen when gplv3 actually comes out? You know there will be a I mean no matter when it will be But there will be a point in time when there is a published license and this license is out there for use And as far as that's concerned I have heard many scenarios and theories and You know there were wild predictions about how you know the earth would shake and there would be rain or fire You know a lot of them I Don't know I have to say that there's always a problem. I love this quote, which is why I had to put it into this Keynote somewhere that in theory there is no difference between practicing three but in practice there is Which is a yogi bearer, and I love this quote so much that it's just The wisdom in this I think is quite apparent in fact what I believe What my feeling for this is is that? What we will have is ultimately an adoption that will happen rather constructively in Several ways I know there are people who would use the license immediately some people were even asking to use the drafts Which they shouldn't do because the draft is not a license So I know I know and many of us Talk to people who would use gplv3 immediately the moment it comes out And some people will the new project will do it for sure Some people won't some people will wait and see how this works If they see it works well, I believe they will They will use it as well, and I believe over several ways What we will see is an adoption of the gplv3 that is much less noisy than the process of drafting Because our community I Mean face it. We like to argue all of us have strong personalities and We are not exactly a dumb community in fact some of the most brilliant minds I know are part of this community and Brilliant people like to argue. So yes, we like to argue we do but This community is also rather pragmatic in various ways when the license is out there It works and it does what we care about people will use it and That's what I'm extremely sure about for companies What I believe will happen is they will analyze the license They will maybe wait a little moment Maybe do it immediately, but at some point they will analyze the license They will see that it is solid reasonable, and they will start using it in their own business interests I think that's exactly what's going to happen. So no, I don't think we're gonna have earthquakes and rain or fire But what I do believe will happen is that the debate on legal issues will shift a little bit It will probably not be so pronounced anymore, but it will shift more towards the structural Towards the question of legal maintainability when I talk About legal maintainability I talk essentially about three main points, which is a the ability to relicense So the ability to actually update a license is necessary I'm fairly certain that many of you will have heard the debate about whether or not one of the major Projects in this community can or cannot change this license. I Don't want to say anything about the fact whether or not that is possible But what I want you to take from this is the fact that it is at times necessary to be able to make that decision and Make it strongly and clearly and without question Also We need the ability to enforce our licenses We have some projects that have to do this incredibly successfully Hardbed of GPL violations would be somebody to mention this context The license is an expressed will of the people right in the software and it should be respected and In fact, we need to find ways to make it more respected the more it gets abused and with the value in for software and The unbelievable potential that is in the software that people in this room Right and others are on the world People are tempted to abuse that There's always somebody who is tempted to take Something from the community and not adhere to his rules and when that happens We should be able to make sure that they play by the rules When Simon Phipps says that they want to be taken filthy rich with free software fine That's not the problem as long as they play by the rules everything is fine and It's the same for everyone else, but we need them to respect the rules of the community which are defined by our licenses and Projects should maintain a clear legal status. It should be clear that there is no Copyright infringement no pain issues on that whole Because otherwise what we see our attacks of the kind of skull that Granted we were able to reflect it But I also think we can expect the next one to be a little smarter to have learned from the mistakes of the first one and Ultimately our only protection is to make sure that we are Solid against this from the start that means we need to pay a little bit of attention to this and That also means we need structures to take care of these issues and one of these structures Just one example because it's not the only one is the free task force of the free software foundation Europe, which is based around expert teams of law and technology Legal experts from around the world together with technological experts getting together to do this job It's run by a full-time coordinator Shane Papa. He's been giving a lightning talk yesterday about the free task force And it's main areas of activity a license education to make sure people understand the rules for our community fiduciary services helping To maintain a status where you know everything is clean. You can't realize if you have to and license enforcement That is what the freedom task force does Now I say actually this is enough about law It's Sunday Some of you may know that I Do martial arts and I've done it for many years and when you do martial arts you start to inherit a certain Tendency to also Look at the philosophical aspects of it This is a an image of Miyamoto Musashi Um Probably the most famous samurai of all time and cultural reference all of Japan until today He was allegedly the inventor of the two-sword fighting style and has written a book the book of the five rings Which until today remains an inspiration? for many people and You may ask yourself Why don't bring up this reference? Well, one of the things that Miyamoto Musashi taught Was that success comes from doing the right thing at the right time Doing too little or doing too much Or doing it too early or too late Can both be determined detrimental whereas you need to have the right amount of things to do at the right time And I believe we as a community are a critical moment It is the right time For us now Because Microsoft Vista is shipping and I'm sure that many of you will have read reviews about it in fact the net is flooded with it and I've had a look at some of them and Picked a quote from one if Vista's price especially for Europeans is its most eye-popping feature at second most eye-popping feature is the Aqua well, I ever desktop interface Indeed I looked nearly as good as KDE Although it demands about three times the system resources Think about this. I mean KDE one of our two main desktops And this is a mainstream journalist saying that KDE picks the hell out of this stuff The KDE looks better And it's faster than this Think about this three years ago. It would have been impossible. I think this is very significant and when I read this And in fact the whole article is worth reading. It's quite funny You know on specific requests I mean the article talks about lots of things the immortal craplets They are not possible to kill because when you kill one intelligent You should have killed it that itself becomes an immortal craplet that doesn't go away. It's a very very funny article But the most important thing here Is to understand What this means for us? Microsoft is unbelievably under pressure The Vista technology is weak I've not read a single article that said that anybody was not impressed It is incredibly expensive And it has gone way out of its way to cripple itself to suit the needs of the around Because of thought that if it did that The media industry the music industry would love it so much that it would make it its favorite platform and Use its power to push it Everywhere so they could control all the channels For that has crippled itself through DRM The irony here is that DRM is increasing yet popular if you read the statements Even from people in the music industry And I'm just thinking about the IMFV and the National Music Manager's Forum here for instance They say DRM is dead give it two years time It's out of the window. It doesn't work People hate it So they have spent years of time Crickling themselves for something That nobody wants And there's another thing this is another quote that dug out from 95. The antitrust thing will blow over Bill Gates That ain't quite so In fact The EC antitrust work that you have a fantastic time Because these two guys were incredibly important in Putting pressure on Microsoft In Europe in the antitrust case without the help from the Sanda team the technical expertise to explain How Microsoft deliberately obstructed interoperability Willfully just for the purpose of obstruction the work would not have been possible And they would not be so much That work is gaining momentum They're currently being fined and fined over and over again because For them the worst thing that could happen is That actually people were able to talk right because you see actually I've seen that also in your talk Jeremy and you're quite right The desktop is where it is decided desktop is where the power is the desktop drives all the stuff that is behind and Microsoft has been abusing that power Massively and that's why this is the right time This is the right time to bring free software to the desktop Microsoft has never been weaker They've never been weaker than today on that front. We now have the chance to actually win the desktop Because people need to migrate they need to upgrade at some point in time and And heck, you know while they're doing it why don't they upgrade to something nice like new Linux with KDE which looks better in this faster You know There's no reason why they shouldn't do that. There's one point You know we have to strategically work now To get that done and that's the right action. There's a global push for open standards and Last year it isn't a governance forum I was on a podium with Sue Struble from some micro systems, which is working a lot of the open standards issues for some And she said and I found this a lovely quote one person's rant reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing terms is another person's backup seat because these rant terms generally are quite discriminatory and normally quite expensive The situation we are in right now is that we have Various standard definitions. We have various definitions of what actually is an open standard Some of them by now are pretty good There's a particular one That is not so bad that is here in Europe from the European to offer ability frame That is not at all bad definition, but may not be perfect, but it's not bad at all In Denmark we have another definition. It's not so bad. It's quite good actually and we see a convergence and interest and Coalition by now to make that definition something along these lines It should be publicly documented and accessible So people can actually get to the specification It should be freely implementable There should be no strings to implement that open standard And it should be maintained by independent organization Not just by one company These are criteria That more or less are by now shared and accepted by large part of industry Except Microsoft essentially and I believe That this is indeed what we can make The definition of an open standard personally, I Would add one thing Which is a pretty soft reference implementation. That is something that I would really like to see enter into this because we have I might once more bring back the you better quote here. We have seen that in theory Open standards depend on certain things, but we've also seen that in practice It's not so easy to actually have an open standard that re-interprets In fact, you know, that's why you have plug-fests and Occasions where you try to interpret with each other to see where does it break If you have a free software reference implementation that process has helped a lot So I think this is indeed a worthwhile thing and in fact, Susie told me in a discussion that she wouldn't have a problem with that at all That from some perspective that it's not a problem. So we have an open standards convergence And that is quite central because you see open standards currently the door Into governmental news Every single government on this planet is currently saying they want open standards You can see it in the world some information society Declaration we want over standard you see in the internet governance for we want open standards You see it in various national publications. You see it on the European Commission level. Everybody says they want open standards and Because that is so We have seen the struggle There is a strategic Point behind this it is if you will a subvertive tap. It is an attempt to establish something in this case Open XML as sufficiently open standard To be acceptable To then make those criteria the ones that should be applied to everything else essentially subverted the open standard definition and that is why we've been working on that field pretty strongly because Once that happens, oh If that were to happen They could also bring in similar proprietary standards that only they can implement and also claim that they were open standards fulfilling What all the governments are crying for This really is the key training point at the moment. This is one of the critical Key issues and this can be our game. I mean free software is uniquely suited in many ways to operate Because we can change the software and And many people argued right we saw that with free software the lock-in can never be perfect because even if That project were to discontinue people could go and see how the code actually did this and Read the same format that is true There will never be a perfect lock-in with first off that is why this is an area where we have home field advantage The first off the foundation is working in various fora together with others I mean at the internet governance for real part of the dynamic coalition open standards and we help that push and that conversion upon a definition that Will work for us That will help us as the free software community but There's one thing But we as a community have to do which is we have to become a little more aware of open standards ourselves if there is an Open standard for whatever your projects do Support it because once you do That opens the door to massive adoption Adoption By governments once you take that step There's almost no argument left against your projects At that point becomes a pure economics game if there's money in it There are large companies that are willing to make money with this This can be our game and you see this is a moment in time. We would pick our quotes and In fact, I mean I have a feeling Bill Gates, but different reviews than me But this is one I found from two or three days ago given to Reuters I don't know what you mean. This does have incredible reception. The reviews have been fantastic This is a big big advance the Windows platform. It's the world's most used piece of software Overall the reliability feedback has been well better than we expected, you know, that's either serious denial of reality or It tells us something about their expectations for how well this is what you received Or this trying to establish a self-fulfilling prophecy and since Bill Gates ain't so done And we may think about what we want, but he's not that done. I believe it is the last Which is why I offer you a second quote here Sandwiched between Vista problems and trust issues in the global push forward standards Microsoft will increasingly lose the initiative Free software will start to cut into the desktop monopoly from which Microsoft has previously exerted force to conquer neighboring markets Eventually Microsoft will be forced from the mentally rethink its business model in favor of free software ultimately, I believe we are a turning point and Ultimately, I think we get to pick our quote with all the things that are going on and the growth of this community I think we are truly a turning point and we can choose Which way you want to go? So we can make that choice this year And I hope we will Thank you very much questions discussions Comments anybody All right, thank you the question was Ultimately, what can people do to support the work as a fee and the work against software patents? Well, I like that question obviously There's where various ways to support our work The first and most easy one to begin with is to join the fellowship in case if you do that in time You even have the chance to win some nice gadgets as a little reward So to do that go to www.fsfe.org and sign up and I hope that many of you will do that if you haven't done so already Secondly We always need people to help us With the work on these issues and help us and our allies as well There's many groups in particular software patents because that was the context in which you ask the question Is an issue where we've been working with a huge coalition and There's various groups that do that work the FFI I is very central in this so get in touch With whatever group you feel most comfortable with working with and work with them because ultimately You know fighting for freedom is fun, but it's also quite a bit of work and You know, we like to do this work. We do it gladly but We really need help because we have just a few people doing what we can against a very well-fund So our work Can make the difference and in fact if you want to get active for instance the software patent work We do here in Brussels Kiran, would you just please stand up for a second Kiran is FFI's representative here in Brussels And he's the guy you should talk to if you want to work with us on that Because he is our main person we hired him full-time to work for us in Brussels against software patents at the peak of the debate and So, you know the fellowship has funded actually his work So, you know by joining the fellowship you would already help, but if you want to do more there's always ways get involved Talk to us Approach us. We are always glad to have more people And I know the same is true for other organizations as well I just see the newly appointed EFF representative here in Europe Eric Who's been a strong force with software patent debate as well. We have various groups who work together on these issues Our strength comes from collaboration just like normal in the first half of the world So we don't do this work alone. We don't claim to do it. We do it as a Community of organizations ultimately of people who share these interests so please You know help us do this work because ultimately those of us who have understood the issues Have a responsibility to act upon them because a large part of society has not understood that these issues exist in the first place That means that for us who have understood the issues the responsibility is greater and We should not wait for others to do that work We should make sure that we do that work together. Do we have other questions? Please? all right essentially the questions about the fact that There are indeed strong parts of corruption in the process And in this case particularly the UK will present in the BBC with their very tight cooperation with Microsoft which is Yes indeed very tight Very cozy very Snub, but it gets increasingly harder to do these things without creating Public debate and if there is no public debate that happens automatically then we may have to create one You know public debates don't just arise you can actually bring them about and I believe in this case in particular It is a very easy debate for us to have Because it should not be the role of any government or any public broadcaster to mandate the use of any certain operating system in any way in particular if that operating system is the convicted monopolist I Mean in this case your convicted monopolist Track down their commission prosecuted by the European Commission and you want to force people to use their software That is a debate That indeed for us. It's relatively easy to win and the outcome of that debate and the position With which you can always win that debate even again the most die-hard conservative politicians is to say We don't want to force you to use as something else But we want is a system that everybody can use equally well, and then you always end up at the open-standard Issue again. Just say we want something that we can all do equally well We don't even need to force them to use free software because once they do everything equally well We are the situation where we can say look could use this or that You have the freedom of choice with open standards You can somebody say oh, you know we can replace that part of the system by another piece of software and Then seriously who in the right mind would choose anything but free software once they have understood the issues Open standards can help us to overcome the locking effect that is currently keeping quite a few people trapped and That is indeed what we should do I've seen another question that gets Hmm interesting Just to repeat the question it was about whether or not we can adopt a more proactive approach instead of a Reactive one as we've done with so many issues including for instance software patents and so on Yes, I actually completely agree with you and this is something that occurred to me a couple of years ago as well That we need to be more proactive on the issue. Although we've actually been working on open standards before open XML became an issue So this was something where we proactive because we understood that this was something where we could make a turning point but In fact, I know several others in the room have as well understood God has been working on open standards for a long long time So yes, I completely share your feeling about this issue and indeed I think Musashi will also tell us That always just defending always just be reacting to another attack is not Exactly wise Should we tell people about freedom and our vision for how that future should look? Yes, and we've been doing that We've been doing that for years in fact We've been doing it so much that some people told us, you know, why are you repeating that message so often? but Ultimately, we think the message still has not got far enough. I mean in this community, certainly Everybody has at some point heard what we had to say about free software and software freedom and how we think that future should look But I am realistic enough to understand that that is not true for everybody That there are people outside this room that have never heard this and I believe we need to get to those people We need to be able to explain it to them and we need to spread the knowledge to them And yes, I believe that this is one of the most important things that we can do which is why first off foundation Europe actually is one of its core activities and Identifying criteria has had the long-term creation of awareness of Bring knowledge outside this group that has this knowledge and making sure others understand it So yes, I believe that is what we should do. There's other activities For instance, like trying to get a better pattern legislation proactively They could work although they obviously have the danger that the other side can do exactly what we did and try to pull up that approach And we find ourselves basically in a very similar battle again But yes, all of these things can be done and some of them should be done Yes, please. I'm not sure I got the question entirely. Sorry, it's a little silent At the beginning of the talk you talked about the TV device, which doesn't permit all software to be installed on it How a free software or the GPL or another license restricts our device to act like that So you want to know how GPLv3 prevents that? Well, I mean, ultimately GPLv3 to my knowledge is the only license that plans to have something like this Although other license might possibly follow that example The way GPLv3 tries to do this ultimately is to say that you don't just have to give the freedoms on paper You know on the license but actually in reality Which means you have to give people what they need to make the software run If you create your device in a way that has those restrictions That it will only run certain software then for the people who get that device with GPLv3 software You will also have to give them whatever they need to make it run That is essentially how GPLv3 will try to address that issue Other licenses as far as I know don't do that It might give an idea if they actually start doing it. I think that might be useful Well, yeah, I mean obviously if you are still free to build whatever device you want and write a piece of proprietary software and stuff it in there I mean What oh, yeah, I mean GPLv2 doesn't protect against this kind of scheme really So you could still you know fork off all GPLv2 projects or write proprietary software or take other code But GPLv3 itself will no longer be able to do that. So I can you say louder? That's a really tricky question. What's the position of the central court for papers in Europe? I have to admit that that's a question that's currently beyond me because So many things will depend on how exactly it is done That in the end I mean the problem right now is if you have your key patent You can't validate in the same way that we get You have to squash it all the country's individual If a central court allowed us to squash that Centrally as we can get them said for you that'd be a good thing. The problem though is How would be implemented and who will control it I mean it all comes down not so much about how We have the structure whether or not the central one is fine or not the question is how exactly it works I mean even the European paint office might work if it stayed out of software to begin with and also if it had a Controlling instance that actually controlled it and could hold responsible, which it doesn't and that's the big problem So it's more structural issue of how you implement this I believe then whether or not that structure exists I think you have you have to talk ultimately about the details to really know what I'm pro or against I'd be for a method to get rid of patents quickly and effectively if they're in the area of software that is very good But if that method is so flawed that it doesn't work Then I'd be against it because we'd be worse off than before because it would seem like there's a way to get rid of them when there really is none And that really only make our position worse therefore The answer would be it depends Well, I am not loyal so take what I say with a certain amount of salt, but I Know that in several countries it is not possible to license under a license that does not yet exist So that you could not at the time when you have licensed Therefore That decision could probably be taken apart in some parts on this planet some of which would be in Europe So If you understood your argument correctly you were saying you did this because you wanted the web clause in there The web service stuff. Have you considered using the a fail or GPL? Okay, so you license under a fail or GPL saying that the automatic upgrade would be GPL Essentially But I think that is probably okay enough anyway because hopefully none of you will die immediately Which means that by the time when GPL B3 comes out You should be around to be able to actually say you like this license and we know license is officially under this license And that's what you should do once it is up until then it'd be under a fail or GPL which is Perfectly fine for that purpose. Therefore, I think should be fine Yes, this is a very common I know that you probably have an answer to this and I will just bring it to you just after short comment Yes, it's a very common practice everywhere on this planet, but Microsoft is Secretly using its market power to force vendors to not sell equipment without Microsoft license The big problem being that while they will tell you this in private If they trust you enough, they would never say so in public just like any other victim of blackmail is afraid of the public So it is very hard to do anything about this one of our the more Swiss team in fact Notified the Swiss and anti-trust authorities of this kind of bundling Because you in Switzerland you can't launch Investigations anonymously Which is quite nice And they will have to investigate So we ditched that ball in there and I believe if other people do the same thing And we keep pointing to that problem We will find some evidence at some point that they can actually use but it's very difficult There are however fortunately sometimes some people who resist that fight But they're very hard to find personally I would recommend to go with one of the three software companies that Pre installs Some of them are not able to get half where without that tax some of them sometimes find some proper without the tax One of them I know is x tops in Germany Don't know why is that who has always you know is always seeking machines that come without the tax So he can actually sell the pre-installed with no limits I don't know what the easy one exists here. I mean, do you have something on that? Had did you document how exactly you did it? This sounds like something we could put on the fellowship side actually in form of some interactive piece of Information where people can put their experience and how to do it in the different countries So if you email us what you've done, maybe we'll put it on the fellowship side And then other people can also put their stuff there that might be a good idea And then we'll find it under fsfe.org How to do that stuff so if you email me that stuff, we'll put it there and then everybody can find it your glass You Well, and the question was about gblv3 and the additional clause that you can't put in there And the question of whether that would create a similar problem as we see with creative comments around You know saying this and the creative commons licensing because that is also one of their different licenses First of all, I should say that I think it would be a mistake to compare creative commons and first off Because they're not the same thing. I also believe they have different goals Whereas for software is already a butterfly Creative commons is still a caterpillar because you know in free software we know What are the base freedoms? We know exactly these this is the bottom line of freedom that you cannot go below This is the minimum we must have Creative commons doesn't have that creative commons is like opening the door to a dialogue to find out How much freedom you need for which area so the two are very different stages of the discussion in their various areas the main criticism that Richard had about creative commons was that people said oh this is okay because it's creative commons license and some creative commons licenses are indeed Relatively non-free I mean from my personal perspective I would consider them a proprietary Now that will never be true for gplg3 because none of the things that you can add to gplg3 will turn into proprietary software license the things that you can add to it are crafted in a way That they define the space of potential Additional clauses But that space is clearly in the domain of free software and One of the ideas of why that was done is to make sure that you could have more license compatibility also Because you had the issues that the gplg2 was Involuntarily incompatible with some other licenses It was not something that people wanted but at the time of gplg2 was written those license simply did not exist so, you know, there was no way to be compatible with them because nobody knew what they were gonna look like and Understanding that people will still write licenses in the future. The decision was to go with a set of clauses and ways of making different decisions on different issues That are k for gplg3 Because that will allow to be compatible with the licenses in that area that is defined by those clauses Even if they are written in the future So instead of having an explicit compatibility list to say, you know, we'll be Compatible of xyz to say we are compatible with licenses in this area They are okay, and I personally think that was one of the Quite intelligent decisions in gplg3 and so far as it allows to increase compatibility But no matter what kind of clause you add All the ones that are allowed to add that are legal to that will still end up being a free software license But yes, I can see why you feel a little uneasy about the fact that it's no longer so easy to know What exact terms you're getting then and I know that some other people also have similar concerns We'll see how that plays out in the end I mean people are discussing this at the moment and in fact, I encourage you to put in your comments I mean if in case you haven't done so already submit them, you know It I think it's very valuable to also see, you know, how many people are concerned about this and How exactly would that problem exist tonight is how to work it out? So, you know if anyone else has that feeling please submit your comments So since that was the last question, I'm going to close this now but not without thanking the Fauston team and Everybody for this really nice event. I love Fauston. I've been here since 2002. I believe every year This one is the first one where the network actually worked the first day Thank you very much. Thank you