STEALTH COMMUNISM: THE GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE (GNU GPL) AND THE FUTURE OF FREE OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (FOSS) (c) www.imagtek.com Free Use and Distribution in Unmodified Form 11 / 2023 DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE! For software developers considering LINUX desktop applications development, what does the LINUX model of FOSS offer? The answer is short and brutal. Nothing. This is by design. LINUX is distributed under the 'GNU General Public License' (GNU GPL) aka 'CopyLeft'. This license imposes upon Developers a system of coercive Collectivism, prohibition and hijack of Intellectual Private Property (IP), designation of 'enemies', and solicitation of secret informants against enemies by a 'Compliance Organization' for prosecution in the courts. This System has a familiar history. It is called Communism. The GNU GPL attacks the foundations of FOSS by imposing Marxist ideology upon software development. It toys with the word 'freedom', then systematically cancels individual freedom via the ruse of 'protecting the freedom of others'. The Marxist rationale of the GNU GPL is that a Utopian 'Software' freedom requires abolition of Software Developer's individual freedom. The GNU GPL conforms to Marxist ideology in viewing individual freedom as a threat, and in its resort to coercion to enforce ideological compliance. That is Pure, by-the-book, Communism. As may be expected, the true nature of the GNU GPL is obfuscated in vague and deceptive legal jargon. Deep within the massive text of this rambling, sermonizing, Manifesto-License, lies the crux of the issue. ' To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work in a fashion requiring Copyright permission, other than the making of an exact copy. The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work. A "covered work" means either the unmodified Program or a work based on the Program. ' --GNU General Public License Version 3, 29 June 2007 ' The above is a cunning legal over-reach into Magical Thinking. The GNU GPL asserts the protections of Copyright Law, yet claims the same Law voids License and Copyright of all IP that it touches. If your application contains a single source code component licensed under the GNU GPL, then the license lays claim to your ENTIRE APPLICATION. All of your work becomes a 'modified version' or is 'based on' the GNU GPL component because, ...wait for it... that is what 'The resulting work is called...'. SHAZAM!!! Merely by stating that Copyright protection of your application disappears, it does so by magic; hijacked as a GNU GPL 'covered work'. But this bizarre claim is baseless. The GNU GPL presents no legal argument, mandate or precedent for its claimed privilege to void lawful License and Copyright by mere association. This is because it has none. The GNU GPL is a delusional Marxist fraud that violates multiple established Principles of Law. From a Systems Engineering perspective the license is a viral, network crawling klepto-algorithm serving a Communist Collective. The legal Foundation of the GNU GPL is a surreal theory that its absurd claims and Magical Thinking represent a brilliant 'hack' of Copyright Law that grants unique, undisputed privilege to void license and force open distribution of Copyright protected IP. This theory is legally baseless. The sole supporting argument is that Marxist ideology supercedes existing Terms of License, legal precedent, lawful Copyright, and documented consent of IP Copyright holders. This argument is also legally baseless. Long established Contract and Copyright Law legislated by elected Governments is not erased by Diktat of a delusional Marxist software license. It is a leap of irony for the 'Free Software Foundation' (FSF) to brand its Marxist cancellation of human freedom as 'software' freedom. FOSS is by definition 'Freely Distributed'. FOSS works are released to the Public with no constraints upon access and use. In contrast, GNU GPL works dictate coercive obligations and liabilities that allegedly supercede lawful License and Copyright of proprietary IP. But there is a Catch-22; in so doing GNU GPL works forfeit status of a lawful 'Free Distribution'. Under Statuatory Law, coercive obligations and liabilities may only be imposed via explicit 2-Party Contractual agreement signed by a named, informed, and consenting counter-party. There is no such thing as a 'Freely Distributed' legally binding Contract of coercive submission to Communism. If there is then the GNU GPL creates Law via edict, erasing the legal Foundations of Intellectual Property. The Manifesto aspect of the GNU GPL explicitly advocates this interpretation. It gets worse. The GNU GPL is Recursive; meaning it claims Collective control of any computer app contaminated by a component tracable through a network of 'association' to an app containing a GNU GPL component. This viral dynamic creates unbounded webs of liability where FOSS components of a GNU GPL contaminated app become vectors of the viral GNU GPL contagion spreading throughout the FOSS Community. This places all FOSS developers under threat of Lawsuits by subsidized Communist fanatics of the 'Software Freedom Conservancy' (SFC); the 'Compliance Organization' for the FSF. The mission of the SFC is to sue anyone suspected of GNU GPL contagion in a non-GNU GPL application. And it gets even worse. FOSS developers are now threatened if any part of their application is 'similar' to a GNU GPL work. Commonly used algorithms have similar expressions in source code that FSF / SFC exploit as a pretext for IP Fraud. This fanaticism is on display in the SFC 'CCFinderX Clone Detector' that flags a 'GNU GPL Violation' at a 3.68% 'Similarity Ratio'; as computed by 'peer reviewed algorithms'. This is not a joke. (Link: sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/ vmware-code-similarity.html) Proving yourself innocent is impossible because if a single component of your work can be 'de-obfuscated' [i.e. re-written] into a 'clone' of a GNU GPL component by SFC fanatics, then you are 'Guilty' and forfeit control of your software application. The FSF calls its legal Frankenstein 'CopyLeft', yet there is NO discernable difference between 'CopyLeft' and Marxism. None. Re-branding Marxism 'CopyLeft' makes it no less Marxist than re-branding a duck 'CopyLeft' makes it less a duck. Competence in the massive text of legalese drivel enforcing 'CopyLeft Compliance' (Link: copyleft.org/guide) is a full time job for a legal professional, thus the Communist idealogues of the FSF / SFC see no irony in being a jobs program for Lawyers. The official SFC corpus on 'CopyLeft Compliance' dictates a dedicated 'GNU GPL Compliance Officer' on every FOSS 'Programming Team' [boots and uniform optional] as well as compulsory 'GNU GPL Compliance Training'. So if you are coding a FOSS application in a coffee shop, you need a 'GNU GPL Compliance Officer' overseeing your 'GNU GPL Compliance' as you labor under the Communist Jack-Boot of 'Software' freedom. Enjoy. Software Developers NEED a livelihood. This is non-negotiable. Yet the Marxist GNU GPL and its Communist supporters dismiss this most fundamental human need, while litigating against Developers to force free distribution of the IP that is their livelihood. This ignores viable business models that support creating and sharing FOSS under open, non-restrictive licensing. The APACHE Software License, MIT, BSD, Unlicense, and Imagtek CDLT Licenses are examples. There are many more. Source code licensing protects FOSS from falling under Copyright restrictions on access and use. Unlike the GNU GPL which claims the right to hijack IP, cancel other licenses, and dictate a coercive 'obligation' by software Developers to labor as slaves for a Communist Collective; non-restrictive FOSS licenses do not seek to legitimize open Fraud and Intellectual Slavery. True FOSS protects access, interests, IP, livelihoods and Freedom of human beings; not Marxist ideology. FSF / SFC websites spew polarizing propaganda casting non-GNU GPL developers as Tyrants or human devouring Orks (Links: sfconservancy.org, defectivebydesign.org). Yet we are assured of FSF / SFC benevolence toward the 'Community'; conditional upon your being 'reasonable' and 'doing the right thing' to avoid 'painful consequences'. This Communist ultimatum has not varied in over a century; and things always get ugly for those who do not 'respond positively' to ultimatums. The latest ultimatum from the SFC is that FOSS Developers are ignoring their 'obligations' to implement SFC 'CopyLeft Compliance Requirements'. These dictate surrender of Copyright protected application IP including all source code, revision control, build scripts, run-time libraries, user guides, and instruction manuals detailing procedures to re-create complex applications. This IP must be surrendered on Demand with full re-distribution rights. Or face a Lawsuit coercing such an IP release, plus unspecified damages. But... The GNU GPL has no standing under Statuatory Law, nor in its attempt to falsely equate 'CopyLeft' with the much broader FOSS movement based upon non-restrictive / non-Marxist licensing. The GNU GPL relies upon the threat of hugely expensive litigation (Lawfare) rather than viable legal argument to impose Marxist ideology. FOSS Developers have avoided litigation in the past by shunning GNU GPL code. Unfortunately, recent escalation and over-reach of GNU GPL fraud via the SFC 'CCFinderX Clone Detector' swindle, now threatens all FOSS. Developers have a right to retain Copyright to Freely Distributed Works; to solicit Improvement of their works by others; to retain Copyright to such Improved Works; and to require documentation advising presence of their work in a larger work. But that is the FULL EXTENT of Developer Rights for 'Freely Distributed Works' under Copyright Law; GNU GPL fraud notwithstanding. There are NO Statuatory grounds for Damages, nor Claims against IP that hosts a 'Freely Distributed' work. Such liabilities disqualify a work as a 'Free Distribution' and require an explicit Contractual Agreement signed by two partys as prerequisite to contract compliance litigation. An extensive infrastructure facilitating non- litigious Collaborative Development already exists (github.com, sourceforge.com, and others). This creates incentives and viable business models supporting FOSS. Developers enjoy an incentive to Freely Distribute their work because they retain Copyright to improvements. Others enjoy free access to functional code they may integrate into useful applications, and/or improve and re-Distribute. But software that imposes coercive liabilities upon developers, is not FOSS. It is Fraud to state that it is. The GNU GPL cripples LINUX applications development via litigation risk against subsidized Communist fanatics. It is time for LINUX to deprecate the GNU GPL. The FSF / SFC dogma that all FOSS applications that do not conform to Marxist ideology must be litigated out of existence, is Bullshit. GNU GPL developers who feel 'harmed' by their 'freely distributed' work being 'freely used' should refrain from freely distributing their work. Or release it under Contract with named counter-parties who consent to IP forfeit as a condition of use. Or see a therapist. LINUX is not a Communist Gulag. Magical Thinking that re-brands Marxism as 'CopyLeft', and re-brands 'Freedom' as submission to Communism, does not erase Copyright Law. Developers are free to donate their time and works as they like, but a coercive license that dictates use of 'Freely Distributed' works only as Communist slaves, is legally Void. THE GNU GPL VIOLATES BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS People have a basic human right to earn a livelihood from their honest labor. The GNU GPL takes away this right. People have a basic human right to practice individual Free Enterprise. The GNU GPL takes away this right. People have a basic human right to undisputed legal ownership and control of original IP they independently create. The GNU GPL takes away this right. People have a basic human right to integrate original IP and FOSS components into applications they legally control. The GNU GPL takes away this right. People have a basic human right to distribute IP under Copyright and License that cannot be hijacked by Marxist Fraud. The GNU GPL takes away this right. The GNU GPL is NOT a joke. It is a noxious Fraud that has marginalized a superior computer operating system. It seeks to debase our legal system with its claim of a Marxist 'Software' freedom that supersedes Human freedom. It imposes upon Software Developers the historical pattern of Communism in its resort to coercion, Byzantine regulation, magical thinking, and disregard for human rights. The GNU GPL has nothing to do with Freedom. It is an attempt to codify into Law virally propagated legal Enslavement of knowledge workers. It seeks to circumvent Labor, Copyright and Patent Law, and to entrap naive Developers as unpaid slaves creating zero-cost software that benefits mainly corporate / government interests. FSF / SFC propaganda depicting non-GNU GPL developers as tyrants or monsters is demented and polarizing. Despite threats of techno-Bolsheviks, unrestricted FOSS Development is proceeding briskly on its own economic merits. LINUX stands on the wrong side of Human Freedom with its FSF / SFC 'Software' freedom Fraud. LINUX' laughable 3.07% share of the computer software applications marketplace is an indictment of the failed ideology of Communism and the GNU GPL. LINUX does not need Fraudulent Marxist licensing. The genuine FOSS movement does not need it. No one needs the GNU GPL. Intellectual Slavery is Not Freedom. (c) References: gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt copyleft.org/guide fsf.org defectivebydesign.org ***Note: gruesome 'devouring Ork' video removed...(06/23) sfconservancy.org sfconservancy.org/linux-compliance/ sfconservancy.org/copyleft-compliance/vmware-code-similarity.html Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels (2004) [1848]. 'Manifesto of the Communist Party'