EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

05.30.08

Dear Google: Is AGPL Evil?

Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, Google, GPL, Microsoft, Windows at 5:15 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

FSF GNU GPLv3Google disregards the AGPL and, as everyone knows, Google Does-No-Evil™, so…

Google loves Free software on its servers. Giving back improvements? Not so much. This continues to be a problem that we mentioned here before [1, 2]. At the moment, Google’s Stein, who is a high-level senior, seems to be doing some damage control. Watch the discussion.

Well, actually, there’s another rather important trend that is conspicuous by its absence: adoption of the Affero GPL. To which Google seems strangely allergic….

But that’s not all. The other day, Google did what it’s exceptionally skilled at protesting against. It made some nifty Web-based features available, but only for Windows (mind highlights in red).

Hypocrisy?

Google’s 3D data has escaped the client and is now a welcome addition to the browser! Today at Google I/O a Google Earth Browser plugin is going to be released. With the plugin installed anybody with a Windows machine will be able to view Google Earth mashups in the comfort of their own browser instead of having to pull up a separate client.

GNU Richard StallmanGoogle could use a gentle reminder here. It was also using ActiveX controls in Google Maps a few years back. You can find my comment and one from DiBona too in the post above. Sympathy is not enough. That’s the same argument which individual Microsoft employees use to defend themselves, passing liability to their superiors. As in, “it came from above.”

Disclaimer: There’s no bias against Google here. The company’s recruiters approached me a couple of times for interviews. I also needed to correct them when they claimed Google Earth to be their ‘innovation’ (it’s an acquisition really).

“The true hypocrite is the one who ceases to perceive his deception, the one who lies with sincerity”

Andre Gide quotes

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

15 Comments

  1. Shane Coyle said,

    May 31, 2008 at 8:35 am

    Gravatar

    Honestly, I am not a fan of the AGPL. To risk sounding Ballmer-esque, I feel it’s a bit ‘viral’.

    I have no problem with the SAAS concept – I think it is adding value to the software, whether it’s simply universal accessibility from anywhere in the world, simplicity of not installing and maintaining a local version, providing online storage and/or collaboration, etc.

    What GPL allows is use of the software for any purpose, and doesn’t really kick in until distribution, if Google uses GPL software internally they are not required to share their modifications. I’m cool with that.

    Google, for the most part, distributes HTML and we can always see the source on that. You send them a request in HTTP, they process it internally using whatever software they like (maybe something GPL), then respond in HTML.

    Take a certiorari business as an example, that receives an application of some sort in the mail, processes it using a modified version of a GPL program, then responds via a document they created – would anyone argue that business MUST be compelled to share their modifications? Not unless they distributed the software.

    I don’t see why, if the service is rendered via the internet, people get more upset. The main thing, in my mind, is that whatever software they do use, they abide by the terms and conditions of the license, whether its BSD GPL or Proprietary.

  2. eMBee said,

    May 31, 2008 at 10:42 am

    Gravatar

    you are missing the point. the proponents of the AGPL are not claiming that SAAS providers are violating the GPL. they are claiming that SAAS providers reduce the freedom of the end user.

    the goal of free software is to allow the end user to read, modify and share the source of the application.

    if i can not read, modify and share the source then this goal of free software is not reached. regardless of the license. yes, the license (including the GPL) does allow that to happen, so this is correct and legal, but as a user i am still at a disadvantage.

    the goal of the AGPL is to change that, and ensure that the end user will always be able to read, modify and share the source of the application.

    it is a simple test really: can you fix the application you are using? can you share it with others? can you run it in your own SAAS server?

    if i want to be sure that you will always have these rights with my application, then i must use the AGPL for my code because otherwise i can not help to protect the rights that i want you to have.

    greetings, eMBee.

  3. Shane Coyle said,

    May 31, 2008 at 10:49 am

    Gravatar

    I see the point of the AGPL, I don’t see the point of criticizing folks for not selecting to use it.

    In the end, it’s the developer’s choice what terms to set for their own code and then it’s the next person’s choice if it’s worth complying or creating their own from scratch, and that is for any license.

    My point was, I don’t embrace the AGPL personally, and certainly don’t think I’m "evil". Unless someone is saying Google is using an AGPL application and not sharing their mods, this is a non-issue to me.

  4. Roy Schestowitz said,

    May 31, 2008 at 11:11 am

    Gravatar

    Shane,

    Fair point. I don’t feel very strongly about it, but I was just a tad disappointed that Google did not offer the choice to developers whose project it’s hosting. it created a chicken-an-egg problem or a self-fulfilling prophecy for Google’s benefit. I actually posted a comment about this in Glyn Moody’s blog, pointing out to Greg Stein that his ‘excuse’ contradicted DiBona’s (Glyn Moody lost that comment and he E-mailed me back this morning to say he could not recover anything… he had similar problem before with GMail flagging Blogger/Blogspot as SPAM… yes, ironic, I know).

    As for the FSF’s view, early in the month I attended Stallman’s talk. He made some good points about potential of embedding malicious features in programs that are run remotely. The longer it goes on for, the more data is likely to be harvested and freedoms taken away. Remember Google’s withdrawal of that DRM-esque video service?

  5. Shane Coyle said,

    May 31, 2008 at 11:43 am

    Gravatar

    My problem with Moody here is, if the problem is that the vendor you are mooching off of isn’t providing a choice you want in a drop-down-box, you can put pressure on them to add that choice – or, the beauty of the whole Free Software Philosophy and the Free Market System, tell them to Fork Off and let’s create a site thats called agplcodehosting.org or whatever and we’ll be the next Google Code, assuming that AGPL is getting more popular…

    Best part is, we’ll use Google ads to fund their own competitor. Hilarious.

    I, personally, wouldn’t be happy with Google’s fiat of limiting the choices of licenses if I were using their services, and would consider taking my "business" elsewhere – if there is an elsewhere, or at least threatening to. Maybe we should consider the contact the webmaster button before calling them Evil?

    Of course, upon closer inspection, it also looks like ‘we’ are the ones who brought the "E-word" into it, so maybe I should shut up now…

    My whole deal with Free Software is that it tickles me in a Libertarian way that nothing else left in the U.S. of A. seems to – it’s the last bastion of hope I suppose.

    Free Software ensures that anyone with the inclination can take that same software and make their own Google, just add in the drive, endless work and luck along with a dozen or so other factors, not the least of which is timing, and hope "it blends". ;^ )

    So I guess I’m saying "Don’t Hate, Innovate." Or, we can always Boycott their asses.

  6. Roy Schestowitz said,

    May 31, 2008 at 12:05 pm

    Gravatar

    …the beauty of the whole Free Software Philosophy and the Free Market System, tell them to Fork Off and let’s create a site thats called agplcodehosting.org or whatever and we’ll be the next Google Code, assuming that AGPL is getting more popular…

    Best part is, we’ll use Google ads to fund their own competitor. Hilarious.

    Some say that Google was able to thrive so quickly because, unlike many other companies, it did not rely on Microsoft technologies such as Windows. It’s hard to compete against a company whose technology you depend on. How much would 1,000,000 Windows servers cost to license? What about scalability? Performance? What happens when one your server farms gets dinged by malware?

    Of course, upon closer inspection, it also looks like ‘we’ are the ones who brought the “E-word” into it, so maybe I should shut up now…

    Oh, I used the wording in a polite and folksy fashion. This conversation has gone on for over a month and from several different directions Google was gently pressured to just ‘hack’ their drop-down box. then copy and paste that GPL thingie and prepend an “A” to it. ;-)

    By the way, recall what Mark Shuttleworth said about Google’s mantra last year.

  7. eMBee said,

    May 31, 2008 at 2:47 pm

    Gravatar

    The main thing, in my mind, is that whatever software they do use, they abide by the terms and conditions of the license, whether its BSD GPL or Proprietary.

    here is actually another point that is missing a detail: it is not the company providing a service that is using the software (they are using it too, but that’s a different issue), but it is the user of the service who is using it. and it is that user of the service who is not getting access to the source without the AGPL.

    greetings, eMBee.

  8. Shane Coyle said,

    May 31, 2008 at 3:17 pm

    Gravatar

    In terms of a hosted app, that does make a very valid point I overlooked. Good point.

  9. akf said,

    June 1, 2008 at 3:13 pm

    Gravatar

    Gee, Google is not the only hosting service out there.
    The FSF is of course hosting AGPL software. Their hosting service is at http://savannah.nongnu.org/

    …but they are also not accepting just any license. Although they are no longer that picky as they once were.

  10. Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso said,

    June 3, 2008 at 7:05 pm

    Gravatar

    [quote]
    Google, for the most part, distributes HTML and we can always see the source on that. You send them a request in HTTP, they process it internally using whatever software they like (maybe something GPL), then respond in HTML.
    [/quote]

    Well, Google heavily obfuscates whatever it can. Have you actually tried to read the HTML of any of its webpages? Elements have randomised names, no whitespaces, lots of trickery that’s not human-readable.

    But the HTML is the least of it. We all know how to render webpages. I don’t care if Google obfuscates HTML. It’s much more serious that it also obfuscates its javascript, to the extent that Konqueror cannot (or could not?) produce a decent experience on Gmail. And what is the difference between interfacing with software that’s actually sitting in your machine and software that is sitting on a remote machine? If you believe in a right (yes, right) to examine, distribute, and modify the source of all software you use, then I argue that it’s no different to use software over an internet connection as it is to use it locally.

  11. Shane Coyle said,

    June 4, 2008 at 8:53 am

    Gravatar

    The difference is, it’s not on my machine, and I am not compelled to use any particular companies’ services if I don’t like them (take MS and Novell, for instance).

    So don’t go on Google’s services/servers – I don’t think I have a right to their code, instead start your own and make sure what you do is AGPL. Again, unless they are using AGPL software and violating the license, I see no issue here – including their JS, which is their JS.

    I don’t care that such things as proprietary software exist – live and let live, to each their own, etc – but I do care when companies like Novell eviscerate the GPL for a week of the monopolist’s profits.

    If Novell distributed Suse BSD Enterprise, I would never have made this site.

  12. Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso said,

    June 4, 2008 at 2:45 pm

    Gravatar

    I can’t figure out how to quote here, so please forgive my amateurish attempts.

    You say “the difference is, it’s not on my machine.” Gmail, for all intents and purposes, is running code on your machine. So are Google apps and so forth. Your machine is the one that is interpreting a lot of the javascript and possibly other things.

    At any rate, why would it matter if it’s on your machine or not? It’s code you are using. It’s code that affects results. It’s code that sometimes you are forced to use.

    I do believe we have a right to code that affects us. The moment “their code” is being distributed to me or its results are being distributed to me, ownership gets very fuzzy. Sure, you can say “don’t use it if you don’t like it”, and that’s more or less what I do most of the time, with any code, regardless of its distribution channel. But being forced for whatever reason to use proprietary software (e.g. by an employer, as I now currently am forced with Google’s apps) is not something we should tolerate.

  13. Roy Schestowitz said,

    June 4, 2008 at 3:11 pm

    Gravatar

    Even with the code available, there’s remote logging, unless you install it yourself, locally.

  14. Shane Coyle said,

    June 4, 2008 at 10:38 pm

    Gravatar

    I think we have much different definitions of ‘forced’.

  15. Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso said,

    June 5, 2008 at 7:16 am

    Gravatar

    Well, I have a choice to not use Google apps if I find a different employer, I guess. But avoiding proprietary software is not that easy, and we shouldn’t have to avoid it, because free choices should be available.

What Else is New


  1. The Death of Software Patents and Microsoft's Coup Against Yahoo! Made the Company Worthless

    A look at what happens to companies whose value is a house of software patents rather than code and a broad base of users/customers



  2. Munich Attack Mentioned by EPO But Not Ansbach

    The EPO does the usual right-wing thing (exploiting disaster/emergency for domestic crackdowns), but some bemoan the omission of the explosion at Ansbach (also in Germany)



  3. Kluwer Thinks People Are Clueless About the Unitary Patent System and Pretends It's Business as Usual

    Flogging the dead UPC horse at times of great uncertainty (enough to bring the UPC to a standstill)



  4. Almost Everything That the Government Accountability Office Says is Applicable to the EPO

    The Government Accountability Office in the United States produces reports which can serve as a timely warning sign to the European Patent Office, where patent quality is rapidly declining in order to meet 'production' goals



  5. Microsoft Says It Loves Linux, But Its Anti-Linux Patent Trolls Are Still Around and Active

    Highlighting just two of the many entities that Microsoft (and partners) use in order to induce additional costs on Free (as in freedom) software



  6. Links 26/7/2016: Microsoft Growing Desperate, Linux 4.8 Visions

    Links for the day



  7. Links 25/7/2016: Linux 4.7 Final, PostgreSQL 9.6 Beta 3

    Links for the day



  8. Leaked: Boards of Appeal Face 'Exile' or 'Extradition' in Haar After Standing up to Battistelli

    A look at some of the latest moves at the European Patent Office (EPO), following Battistelli's successful coup d’état which brought the EPO into a perpetual state of emergency that perpetuates Battistelli's totalitarian powers



  9. The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) Comes Across as Against Software Patents, Relates to the EPO as Well

    Some analysis of the input from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) with focus on the EPO and software patents



  10. In the US, Patent Trolls Engage in Patent Wars and Shakedowns, Whereas in China/Korea Large Android OEMs Sue One Another

    Highlighting some of the differences between the US patent system and other patent systems



  11. Links 24/7/2016: Elive 2.7.1 Beta, New Flatpaks and Snaps

    Links for the day



  12. Links 23/7/2016: Leo Laporte on GNU/Linux, Dolphin Emulator’s Vulkan Completion

    Links for the day



  13. Links 22/7/2016: Wine 1.9.15, KaOS 2016.07 ISO

    Links for the day



  14. Haar Mentioned as Likely Site of Appeal Boards as Their Eradication or Marginalisation Envisioned by UPC Proponent Benoît Battistelli

    Not only the Staff Union of the European Patent Office (SUEPO) is under severe attack and possibly in mortal danger; the increasingly understaffed Boards of Appeal too are coming under attack and may (according to rumours) be sent to Haar, a good distance away from Munich and the airport (half an hour drive), not to mention lack of facilities for visitors from overseas



  15. EPO Attaché Albert Keyack Viewed as Somewhat of a Mole, Reporting From the US Embassy in Brazil Until Shortly Before the Temer Coup

    Public responses to the role played by Albert Keyack on behalf of the United States inside the European [sic] Patent Office



  16. EPO Insiders Explain Why the EPO's Examination Quality Rapidly Declines and Will Get Even Worse Because of Willy Minnoye

    Public comments from anonymous insiders serve to highlight a growing crisis inside the European Patent Office (EPO), where experienced/senior examiners are walking away and leaving an irreplaceable bunch of seats (due to high experience demands)



  17. Patents Roundup: BlackBerry, Huawei, PTAB, GAO, Aggressive Universities With Patents, and Software Patents in Europe

    Various bits and pieces of news regarding patents and their fast-changing nature in the United States nowadays



  18. Glimpse at Patent Systems Across the World: Better Quality Control at the USPTO Post-America Invents Act (2011), Unlike the EPO Post-Battistelli (2010)

    While the EPO reportedly strives to eliminate pendency and appeal windows altogether (rubberstamping being optimal performance as per the yardstick du jour), the USPTO introduces changes that would strengthen the system and shield innovation, not protect the business model of serial litigants



  19. Blockstream Has No Patents, But Pledges Not to Sue Using Patents

    Blockstream says that it comes in peace when it comes to software patents, which triggers speculations about coming Blockchain patent wars



  20. Links 21/7/2016: Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS, Linux Mint 18 “Sarah” Xfce Beta

    Links for the day



  21. Links 21/7/2016: An Honorary Degree for Alan Cox, Looks Back at DebConf16

    Links for the day



  22. EPO USA: Under Battistelli, the 'European' Patent Office Emulates All the Mistakes of the USPTO

    Conservative Benoît Battistelli is trying to impose on the European Patent Office various truly misguided policies and he viciously attacks anyone or anything that stands in his way, including his formal overseers



  23. Links 19/7/2016: ARM and Opera Buyout

    Links for the day



  24. Large Corporations' Software Patenting Pursuits Carry on in Spite of Patent Trolls That Threaten Small Companies the Most

    With unconvincing excuses such as OIN, large corporations including IBM continue to promote software patents in the United States, even when public officials and USPTO officials work towards ending those



  25. Battistelli Has Implemented De Facto EPO Coup to Remove Oversight, Give Himself Total Power, and Allegedly Give UPC Gifts (Loot) to French Officials

    Benoît Battistelli's agenda at the EPO is anything but beneficial to the EPO and suspicions that Battistelli's overall agenda is transitioning to the UPC to further his goals grow feet



  26. EPO Social [sic] Report is a Big Pile of Lies That Responsible Journalists Must Ignore

    A reminder of where the EPO stands on social issues and why the latest so-called 'social' report is nothing but paid-for propaganda for Battistelli's political ambitions



  27. Links 18/7/2016: Vista 10 a Failure, FreeType 2.7

    Links for the day



  28. Exploiting Perceived Emergencies/Disasters, Suspending the Rule of Law, and Suspending Judges: How Erdoğan is Like Battistelli, Except the Coup

    Pretexts for crackdown on law-abiding people or figureheads who are remote and independent the hallmark not only of Erdoğan but also the EPO's President, Benoit Battistelli



  29. The Impotence of Gene Quinn

    Attacking the enforcer of Alice v CLS because it's doing harm to his source of income, which makes him angry



  30. After the FTI Consulting-EPO Reputation Laundering Deal's Expansion in Germany Süddeutsche Zeitung 'Forgets' That the EPO Even Exists

    Relative apathy if not complete silence regarding the EPO at Süddeutsche Zeitung following reports of FTI Consulting's deal expansion (media positioning in Germany), with hundreds of thousands of Euros (EPO budget) thrown at the controversial task


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts