The case centers around the US Patent Office's rejection of Bernard Bilski's application on a computer-assisted method of hedging risk in the commodities trade, but the court's decision will have much wider implications.
At issue in Bilski is a patent system that has come to stifle rather than spur innovation over the past 20 years by awarding patents to “business methods” that are central to the operations of pharmaceutical companies, financial services firms, and insurance providers, among others. Activities that have become part of peoples' daily lives, from online shopping to searching Wikipedia, will also be affected by Bilski.
As a non-profit legal services firm for Free and Open Source Software programmers, the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) is one of the many organizations with an interest in the outcome of Bilski. Google, Bank of America, J.C. Penney, and Bloomberg LLC are some of the other third-parties that submitted briefs to the court.
The SFLC has published a new Bilski resource page to guide anyone interested in the history and significance of the case. It includes short summaries of some of the briefs submitted to the court, background documents, previously published SFLC commentary about the case, and links to other web resources.
";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:7:"pubDate";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:31:"Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:35:00 -0500";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"guid";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:99:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/nov/05/new-bilski-v-kappos-resources-available-sflc-websi/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}}}}i:1;a:6:{s:4:"data";s:0:"";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";s:5:"child";a:1:{s:0:"";a:5:{s:5:"title";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:47:"Patent Law at a Crossroads: Bilski and Beyond ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"link";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:88:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/oct/29/patent-law-crossroads-bilski-and-beyond/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:11:"description";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:1485:"On November 9, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral arguments in Bilski v. Kappos, a case that could fundamentally alter the application and scope of U.S. patent law and be felt across the economy, from banking and e-commerce to software and pharmaceuticals.
In deciding whether to uphold the US Patent Office's rejection of Bernard Bilski's 1997-patent application on a process of hedging risk in commodities trading, the court will determine whether computer software and business methods are subject matter that can be patentable at all.
For more than twenty years, Columbia Law School Professor Eben Moglen has been working on issues of intellectual property and intellectual freedom. As the founding director of the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) since 2005, Moglen has provided pro-bono legal services to free and open source software developers and been at the center of the debate on patent policy in the U.S.
On November 2, Professor Moglen will discuss the significance of the Bilski case and the evolution of U.S. patent law from promoting industrialization in the 19th Century to controlling the most important commodity in today's economy, information.
Where: Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Room 423
When: 12:00 pm on November 2, exactly one week before opening arguments in Bilski v. Kappos at the Supreme Court.Contact: Lysandra Ohrstrom, SFLC Communications Director, (212) 461-1915
";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:7:"pubDate";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:31:"Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:24:00 -0500";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"guid";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:88:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/oct/29/patent-law-crossroads-bilski-and-beyond/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}}}}i:2;a:6:{s:4:"data";s:0:"";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";s:5:"child";a:1:{s:0:"";a:5:{s:5:"title";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:95:"Software Freedom Law Center Files Brief with Supreme Court Arguing Software Cannot Be Patented ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"link";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:69:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/oct/02/sflc-files-in-bilski/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:11:"description";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:2684:"
Today the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC), provider of pro-bono legal services to non-profit developers and distributors of free and open source software, filed a brief with the United States Supreme Court arguing that software standing alone cannot constitutionally be patented.
In this closely-watched case, the Supreme Court will decide whether the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was correct in restricting patentable processes to those "tied to a particular machine or apparatus," or which "transform[s] a particular article into a different state or thing," a conclusion which if fully implemented could bring to an end the widespread patenting of computer programs.
"Software patenting has been a scourge in the global technology industries, let loose by a misinterpretation of US patent law by lower court judges biased in favor of patentability," said Professor Eben Moglen of Columbia Law School, founding executive director of SFLC. "Over the last twenty years, everyone from Microsoft to academic computer scientists to hobbyist developers have been hassled, interfered with and forced to pay legal fees and royalties sometimes reaching into the hundreds of millions of dollars on the basis of patents that should never have been issued in the first place. This case gives the Supreme Court a chance to reaffirm what its past cases have held for more than a century: that no patent law consistent with the US Constitution can permit the monopolization of abstract ideas."
SFLC's brief supports the position that software is unpatentable by showing that software is merely a set of detailed instructions in a language that humans can understand and computers can execute, no more subject to patent monopolization than a mathematical equation or the precise description of a law of physics. Mathematical expressions and facts of nature cannot be patented, as the Supreme Court has repeatedly held since the mid-nineteenth century. SFLC's brief also shows that software patents hinder innovation in software, and thus run counter to the Constitutional authorization of patents "to promote the progress of science and useful arts." "Everyone would have been better off if software had never been patented," Professor Moglen says. "Now the Court can correct the mistakes of the lower courts, talented programmers everywhere will breathe easier as they invent our future, and we will all have better technology at lower prices. That's the value of keeping ideas free, as in free speech."
The full brief is available on the Web here
";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:7:"pubDate";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:31:"Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:31:00 -0500";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"guid";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:69:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/oct/02/sflc-files-in-bilski/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}}}}i:3;a:6:{s:4:"data";s:0:"";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";s:5:"child";a:1:{s:0:"";a:5:{s:5:"title";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:68:"SFLC files objection to Google Book settlement on behalf of clients ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"link";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:84:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/sep/08/sflc-objects-google-book-settlement/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:11:"description";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:1433:"Today SFLC filed a letter with the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York objecting to the Google Book Search Copyright Class Action Settlement. In the letter, filed on behalf of the FSF and author Karl Fogel, SFLC asks the court to consider the impact of the settlement upon members of the class who have distributed their works under Free licenses.
While the FSF objects to the settlement on other grounds, this letter highlights how the proposed settlement does not contemplate works distributed under the GNU Free Documentation License (the FDL) or the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license (the CC-BY-SA). If the Settlement is approved, Google will be authorized to continue to digitize, sell and partially display books without complying with the "copyleft" and "share alike" license terms which are which are essential to the freedom granted by these licenses.
The letter urges the Court to reject the proposed settlement until these and other objections are addressed, including that terms are incorporated to protect the authors of freely licensed works and a framework is provided for the Book Rights Registry that respects the choice of authors to share their works. The full text of the letter is available here (pdf).
";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:7:"pubDate";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:31:"Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:22:00 -0500";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"guid";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:84:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/sep/08/sflc-objects-google-book-settlement/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}}}}i:4;a:6:{s:4:"data";s:0:"";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";s:5:"child";a:1:{s:0:"";a:5:{s:5:"title";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:37:"New media position available at SFLC ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"link";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:82:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/jul/30/new-media-position-available-sflc/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:11:"description";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:679:" The Software Freedom Law Center is looking for a motivated individual to join our staff in a new and challenging public relations position, "Project Liaison and Media Relations". Details and instructions for applying are available on the opportunities page. The Software Freedom Law Center is looking for a motivated individual to join our staff in a new and challenging public relations position, "Project Liaison and Media Relations". Details and instructions for applying are available on the opportunities page. ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:7:"pubDate";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:31:"Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:44:00 -0500";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"guid";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:82:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/jul/30/new-media-position-available-sflc/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}}}}i:5;a:6:{s:4:"data";s:0:"";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";s:5:"child";a:1:{s:0:"";a:5:{s:5:"title";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:46:"SFLC Files Amicus Brief in Jacobsen v. Katzer ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"link";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:70:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/jun/15/jacobsen-amicus-brief/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:11:"description";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:1609:"Amicus Brief calls for injunctive relief for FLOSS Developers
Today, SFLC filed a brief amicus curiae in the case Jacobsen v. Katzer before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). In the brief, we argue that a Free, Libre, and Open Source Software (FLOSS) developer whose license has been violated should be able to call upon the courts to prevent further infringing distributions.
In an earlier appeal, the CAFC correctly upheld the availability of copyright remedies in cases of FLOSS license violations (as discussed on SFLC's blog last year). However, upon remand, the lower court held that Jacobsen had not shown sufficient harm to qualify for an injunction against the defendant. That decision overlooked the multitude of harms — to developers, development communities, and project productivity — which we outline in our brief.
The CAFC recognized in the prior appeal that injunctions are essential to enforcing FLOSS licenses, and we are confident that it will do so again. You can read the brief on SFLC's resources page, and listen to our special podcast episode about the brief.
";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:7:"pubDate";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:31:"Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:36:00 -0500";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"guid";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:70:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/jun/15/jacobsen-amicus-brief/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}}}}i:6;a:6:{s:4:"data";s:0:"";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";s:5:"child";a:1:{s:0:"";a:5:{s:5:"title";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:33:"FSF and Cisco Settle GPL Dispute ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"link";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:69:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/may/20/fsf-cisco-settlement/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:11:"description";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:2505:"The Software Freedom Law Center is pleased to announce that its client the Free Software Foundation has reached an agreement with Cisco Systems, Inc., settling the lawsuit filed by the FSF last December.
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) and Cisco Systems, Inc. are pleased to announce that they have reached a joint agreement.
Under the agreement, the FSF has agreed to dismiss its lawsuit against Cisco.
Cisco has agreed to appoint a Free Software Director for Linksys, a subsidiary of Cisco, to supervise Linksys’ compliance with the requirements of free software licenses such as the GPL (the GNU General Public License). The Free Software Director will report periodically to the FSF regarding Linksys’ compliance efforts. Cisco has further agreed to take certain steps to notify previous recipients of Linksys products containing FSF programs of their rights under the GPL and other applicable licenses, to publish a licensing notice on the Linksys website, and to provide additional notices in a separate publication. In addition, Cisco will continue to make the complete and corresponding source code for versions of FSF programs used with current Linksys products freely available on its website. Cisco will also make a monetary contribution to the FSF.
The parties recognize Cisco’s ongoing obligations under the GPL and other free software licenses. The FSF will continue to independently monitor Linksys’ compliance with these licenses, and work with Linksys to resolve any new issues that may arise.
“We are glad that Cisco has affirmed its commitment to the free software community by implementing additional measures within its compliance program and dedicating appropriate resources to them, further reassuring the users’ freedoms under the GPL,” said Peter Brown, Executive Director of the FSF. “Our agreement results in making all of the relevant source code available in the fastest way possible.”
The FSF has an announcement on its website, as well as a message to the community about the settlement from Brett Smith, head of the FSF's Compliance Lab.
";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:7:"pubDate";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:31:"Wed, 20 May 2009 13:00:00 -0500";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"guid";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:69:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/may/20/fsf-cisco-settlement/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}}}}i:7;a:6:{s:4:"data";s:0:"";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";s:5:"child";a:1:{s:0:"";a:5:{s:5:"title";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:26:"Settled, But Not Over Yet ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"link";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:69:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/mar/30/settled-not-over-yet/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:11:"description";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:1266:"Today's settlement between Microsoft and TomTom ends one phase of the community's response to Microsoft patent aggression, and begins another. On the basis of the information we have, we have no reason to believe that TomTom's settlement agreement with Microsoft violates the license on the kernel, Linux, or any other free software used in its products. The settlement neither implies that Microsoft patents are valid nor that TomTom's products were or are infringing.
The FAT filesystem patents on which Microsoft sued are now and have always been invalid patents in our professional opinion. SFLC remains committed to protecting the interests of our clients and the community. We will act forcefully to protect all users and developers of free software against further intimidation or interference from these patents.
SFLC, working with the Open Invention Network and the Linux Foundation, is pleased to participate in a coordinated, carefully graduated response on behalf of all the community's members to ongoing anti-competitive Microsoft conduct. We believe in strength through unity, and we think our community's unity in the face of these threats has helped to bring about Microsoft's quick settlement on all issues with TomTom.
";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:7:"pubDate";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:31:"Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:22:00 -0500";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"guid";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:69:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/mar/30/settled-not-over-yet/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}}}}i:8;a:6:{s:4:"data";s:0:"";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";s:5:"child";a:1:{s:0:"";a:5:{s:5:"title";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:57:"SFLC Seeks Patent Attorney dedicated to Software Freedom ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"link";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:88:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/mar/04/patent-attorney-wanted-software-freedom/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:11:"description";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:1506:"The Software Freedom Law Center, a New York based not-for-profit legal services organization that provides legal representation and other law-related services to protect and advance Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), seeks a registered patent attorney passionate about defending software freedom.
The Patent Attorney will principally be assigned to patent related legal matters, including counseling, opinion work, drafting of requests for reexamination and possibly litigation support. The Patent Attorney will also be asked to assist with other SFLC legal matters involving copyright, licensing, trademark and corporate issues. In addition, the Patent Attorney will be expected to publish writings and make public presentations on topics relating to patent law's impact on FOSS.
In addition to being registered to practice before the USPTO, candidates should have a minimum of two years patent law experience, a software or computer science related technical background, and familiarity with FOSS. Ideal candidates will already be a competent and regular user of a Free Software operating system.
Salary is comparable to public sector legal positions in New York and not commensurate with private practice. An excellent benefits package is provided. To apply, please submit a resume in a free data format (such as OpenOffice) to attorneyposition@softwarefreedom.org. SFLC is an equal opportunity employer.
";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:7:"pubDate";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:31:"Wed, 04 Mar 2009 09:01:00 -0500";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"guid";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:88:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/mar/04/patent-attorney-wanted-software-freedom/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}}}}i:9;a:6:{s:4:"data";s:0:"";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";s:5:"child";a:1:{s:0:"";a:5:{s:5:"title";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:40:"GCC Runtime Library Exception for GPLv3 ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"link";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:62:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/jan/27/gcc-exception/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:11:"description";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:1283:"New Exception Allows GCC to Move Fully to GPLv3
Today, SFLC, along with its client the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and the GCC Steering Committee, announce the release of a new GCC Runtime Library Exception. This license exception will allow the GCC codebase to be upgraded to GPLv3, and enable the development of a plugin framework for GCC.
This exception allows the various GCC libraries, which were licensed under GPLv2 and the GPLv2-based-exception, to now be licensed under GPLv3 with this new exception. In addition, the new exception has been carefully designed to address potential software freedom issues related to GCC plugins. With this new exception, GCC can add a plugin architecture while still ensuring the future freedom of the GCC codebase.
More information is available in FSF's press release, the GCC Steering Committee's announcement, the text of the new GCC Runtime Library Exception, and the FAQ and Rationale document for the new exception. ";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:7:"pubDate";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:31:"Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:01:00 -0500";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}s:4:"guid";a:1:{i:0;a:5:{s:4:"data";s:62:"http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/jan/27/gcc-exception/";s:7:"attribs";a:0:{}s:8:"xml_base";s:0:"";s:17:"xml_base_explicit";b:0;s:8:"xml_lang";s:0:"";}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}s:7:"headers";a:14:{s:4:"date";s:29:"Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:12:56 GMT";s:6:"server";s:96:"Apache/2.2.8 (Ubuntu) DAV/2 SVN/1.5.1 mod_python/3.3.1 Python/2.5.2 mod_ssl/2.2.8 OpenSSL/0.9.8g";s:7:"expires";s:29:"Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:22:56 GMT";s:4:"vary";s:6:"Cookie";s:13:"last-modified";s:29:"Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:12:56 GMT";s:4:"etag";s:32:"1a13fddb5baec97e48a5d7f29e20e4e2";s:13:"cache-control";s:11:"max-age=600";s:12:"content-type";s:19:"application/rss+xml";s:3:"age";s:3:"102";s:14:"content-length";s:5:"20565";s:7:"x-cache";s:22:"HIT from john-marshall";s:14:"x-cache-lookup";s:27:"HIT from john-marshall:3128";s:3:"via";s:43:"1.0 john-marshall:3128 (squid/2.6.STABLE18)";s:10:"connection";s:5:"close";}s:5:"build";i:20070719221955;}