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. With UPC Dead for Battistelli's Entire Remaining Term, No Reason for the EPO or the Administrative Council to Keep Battistelli Around

    Thoughts about what happens to the EPO's leadership after 'Brexit' (British exit from the EU), which severely undermines Battistelli's biggest project that he habitually used to justify his incredible abuses



  2. Links 24/6/2016: Xen Project 4.7, Cinnamon 3.0.6

    Links for the day



  3. Benoît Battistelli Should Resign in Light of New Leak of Decision in His Vendetta Against Truth-Telling Judge (Updated)

    Benoît Battistelli continues to break the EPO's own rules, not just national laws, as a new decision helps reveal



  4. Fake Patents on Software From Fake Australian 'Inventor' of Bitcoin and the Globally-Contagious Nature of EPO Patent Scope

    News from Australia regarding software patents that should not be granted and how patent lawyers from Australia rely on European patent law (EPO and UK-IPO) for guidance on patent scope



  5. Patent Lawyers Love (and Amplify) Halo and Enfish, Omit or Dismiss Cuozzo and Alice

    By misinterpreting the current situation with respect to software patents and misusing terms like "innovation" patent lawyers and others in the patent microcosm hope to convince the public (or potential clients) that nothing in effect has changed and software patents are all fine and dandy



  6. Looks Increasingly Plausible That Battistelli is Covering up Bogus and/or Illegally-Obtained 'Evidence' From the EPO's Investigative Unit

    Why we believe that Benoît Battistelli is growingly desperate to hide evidence of rogue evidence-collecting operations which eventually landed himself -- not the accused -- in a catastrophic situation that can force his resignation



  7. As Decision on the UK's EU Status Looms, EPO Deep in a Crisis of Patent Quality

    Chaotic situation at the EPO and potential changes in the UK cause a great deal of debate about the UPC, which threatens to put the whole or Europe at the mercy of patent trolls from abroad



  8. Another Demonstration by European Patent Office (EPO) Staff on Same Day as Administrative Council's Meeting

    SUEPO (staff union of the EPO) continues to organise staff actions against extraordinary injustice by Benoît Battistelli and his flunkies whom he gave top positions at the EPO



  9. Links 23/6/2016: Red Hat Results, Randa Stories

    Links for the day



  10. Interview With FOSSForce/All Things Free Tech

    New interview with Robin "Roblimo" Miller on behalf of FOSSForce



  11. Links 22/6/2016: PulseAudio 9.0, GNOME 3.21.3 Released

    Links for the day



  12. IP Europe's UPC Lobbying and the EPO Connection

    The loose but seemingly ever-growing connections between AstroTurfing groups like IP Europe (pretending to represent SMEs) and EPO staff which is lobbying-centric



  13. EPO “Recruitment of Brits is Down by 80%”

    Letter says that “recruitment of Brits is down by 80%” and "the EPO lost 7% of UK staff in one year"



  14. The Conspiracy of Patent Lawyers for UPC and Battistelli's Role in Preparing by Firing People

    The parasitic firms that lobby for the UPC and actually create it -- firms like those that pass money to Battistelli's EPO -- are doing exactly the opposite of what Europe needs



  15. Patent Lawyers, Having Lost Much of the Battle for Software Patents in the US, Resort to Harmful Measures and Spin

    A quick glance at how patent lawyers and their lobbyists/advocates have reacted to the latest decision from the US Supreme Court (Justice Breyer)



  16. Links 21/6/2016: Fedora 24 and Point Linux MATE 3.2 Officially Released

    Links for the day



  17. Supreme Court on Cuozzo v Lee Another Major Loss for Software Patents in the United States

    Much-anticipated decision on the Cuozzo v Lee case (at the highest possible level) serves to defend the appeal boards which are eliminating software patents by the thousands



  18. As Alice Turns Two, Bilski Blog Says 36,000 (Software) Patent Applications Have Been Rejected Thanks to It

    A look back at the legacy of Alice v CLS Bank and how it contributed to the demise of software patents in the United States, the birthplace of software patents



  19. EPO Self-Censorship by IP Kat or Just Censorship of Opinions That IP Kat Does Not Share/Accept (Updated)

    ree speech when it's needed the most (EPO scandals) needs to be respected; or why IP Kat shoots itself in the foot and helps the EPO's management by 'sanitising' comments



  20. Caricature: Bygmalion Patent Office

    The latest cartoon regarding Battistelli's European Patent Office



  21. Links 21/6/2016: GNU/Linux in China's HPC, Linux 4.7 RC4

    Links for the day



  22. Under Battistelli's Regime the EPO is a Lawless, Dark Place

    How the EPO's Investigative Unit (IU) and Control Risks Group (CRG), which is connected to the Stasi through Desa, made the EPO virtually indistinguishable from East Germany (coat of arms/emblem above)



  23. New Paper Demonstrates That Unitary Patent (UPC) is Little More Than a Conspiracy of Patent 'Professionals' and Their Self Interest

    Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna's latest paper explains that the UPC “expert teams” are in fact not experts but people who are using the UPC as a Trojan horse by which to promote their business interests and corporate objectives



  24. Money Flying to Private Companies Without Tenders at Battistelli's EPO (by the Tens of Millions!)

    Extravagant and cushy contracts to the tune of tens of millions of Euros are being issued without public scrutiny and without opportunities to competition (few corporations easily score cushy EPO contracts while illusion of tendering persists -- for small jobs only)



  25. Patent Examiners and Insiders Acknowledge Profound Demise in Patent Quality Under Battistelli

    By lowering the quality of patents granted by the European Patent Office Battistelli hopes to create an illusion of success, where success is not measured properly and is assessed by biased firms which he finances



  26. Jericho Systems Threatens Alice, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Threatens the Patent Trial and Appeal (PTAB)

    A look at the two latest threats to those who helped put an end to a lot of (if not most) software patents in the US



  27. How the Halo Electronics Case Helps Patent Trolls and How Publications Funded by Patent Trolls (IAM for Instance) Covered This

    A Supreme Court ruling on patents, its implications for software patent trolls, and how media that is promoting software patents and patent trolls covered it



  28. Patent Lawyers' Fantasy Land Where Software Patents Are Suddenly Resurrected Even When They're Not

    A quick glance at where the debate over software patents in the United States stands and how profiteers (such as patent lawyers) not only mislead the public but also bully the messengers



  29. Links 19/6/2016: Randa Over, Fedora 24 Release Soon

    Links for the day



  30. [ES] La Oficina Europea de Patentes de Battistelli Amplia su Contrato con el Nefasto FTI Consulting Para Neutralizar a los Medios, Desperdicia Millones de Euros

    Sacando a luz a lo que pasa con el presupuésto de la EPO y como es puesto “a trabajar” bajo la tiranía sin precedente de Battistelli (Eponia) justo en el corazón de Europa


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