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. Alice Continues to Smash Software Patents So Patent Lawyers, Monopolists' Lobbyists Etc. Now Attack the Supreme Court for Doing This

    Corporate lobbyists and patent lawyers are trying to put Alice in the grave, for its impact on software patents is very profound and thus far almost unstoppable



  2. How to Salvage the EPO's Reputation: Create More Boards of Appeal in Europe and Abolish the Misguided UPC Fantasy

    A critical evaluation of what goes on at the European Patent Office (EPO), which is quickly descending down (and overall degrading) to the level of Chinese systems, along with the corruption, the abuses, and the low quality of patents



  3. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Has Just Sided With Patent Trolls

    The notorious CAFC, which manifested software patents in the United States, has just given a gift to patent trolls that typically use software patents for extortion down in Texas



  4. Analyses of the Latest Data From Lex Machina About Patent Litigation Show Some Litigation Declines

    Professor Mark Lemley's Lex Machina highlights litigation trends by collecting and analysing data related to patents and pertaining to intellectual monopolies in general; now it shows litigation droughts



  5. India is Having Another Taste of the Dangers of Western Patents, Must Learn to Reject Software Patents in the Face of Great Pressure

    The growing software giant which is India continues to face cruel and aggressive lobbying from the West, enabling the West to control India by patents that should not exist in the first place



  6. Links 29/4/2016: GNOME 3.21.1, Fairphone

    Links for the day



  7. Microsoft Says It Will Continue to Extort Companies That Distribute Linux, Using Software Patents As Usual

    Microsoft's war on Linux, a war which is waged using software patents (for revenue and/or for coercion in bundling deals), is still going on in spite of all the PR tactics from Microsoft and its paid partners



  8. Australia Might be Next to Block Software Patents If Commission's Advice is Followed

    Australian advice against software patents, which can hopefully influence Australian politicians and put an end, once and for all, to all software patents in Australia



  9. [ES] ''Si la Forma de Pensar de la EPO fuese Seguida, Guantánamo Sería Posible en Suelo Alemán.”

    La EPO está todavía bajo fuego, pero mucho de ello pasa detrás de las cortinas y envuelve abogados y/o burócratas



  10. The European Copy-Paste Office (EPO)

    This morning's example (not the first) of how the EPO uses 'social' media



  11. Links 28/4/2016: Fedora 24, EE Goes Open Source

    Links for the day



  12. Amid Referendum “the New European Unitary Patent System is Likely to Collapse Before It Started”

    The Unitary Patent Court (UPC) vision seems like it may be just one month away from its gradual death, depending on British voices amongst other key factors



  13. USTR is Trying to Shame and Bully India Into Introducing Software Patents in India

    Lobbying body of the US (corporations-led) is trying its usual dirty tactics against India's sound policy which excludes software/algorithms from patent scope



  14. No, Visual Studio is NOT Open Source and Xamarin Openwashing is NOT News

    The latest example of Microsoft openwashing, courtesy of confidants of Microsoft and those who got bamboozled by them



  15. Latest Black Duck Puff Pieces a Good Example of Bad Journalism and How Not to Report

    Why the latest "Future of Open Source Survey" -- much like its predecessors -- isn't really a survey but just another churnalism opportunity for the Microsoft-connected Black Duck, which is a proprietary parasite inside the FOSS community



  16. If EPO “Form of Thinking Were to be Followed, Guantanamo on German Soil Would be Possible.”

    The EPO is still under fire, but a lot of it happens behind the scenes and involves lawyers and/or bureaucrats



  17. Links 28/4/2016: Tomb Raider for GNU/Linux, Proxmox VE 4.2

    Links for the day



  18. [ES] La Departura de la Readidad de la EPO Y Su Entrada en la Esféra Industrial China de Propaganda

    La deceptiva trampa del maximálism de patentes, donde se asume que artficialmente aumentando el número de patentes otorgadas traerá el resultado esperado



  19. [ES] Una Fársa de Sistema: ¿Cómo la SIPO, USPTO, y cada vez más la EPO se Convierten en Llenado de Patentes (No Se Requiere Propia Examinación)

    Una crítica al decline en la calidad de patentes en algunas de las más grandes oficinas de patentes del mundo, donde aspiración parece ser neo-liberal en el sentido económico



  20. [ES] Microsoft ‘Asalto con Todo’ Contra Android, Java, y GNU/Linux, Usando la Clásica E.E.E. Táctica de Nuevo

    Otro recordatorio de la realidad que Microsoft está muy activo en el frente E.E.E., not no sólo contra GNU/Linux pero también Android y Java



  21. [ES] Más Rumores y Llamadas Acerca de Prospectos de Microsoft Vaya a Comprar Canonical (Ubuntu con todo y Zapatos)

    Teniendo en cuenta los últimos movimientos de Canonical, algunos expertos piensan que es posible que Shuttleworth elija el dinero a Microsoft sobre principios sino también inste para que esto ocurra



  22. Links 27/4/2016: A Lot About OpenStack, Vivaldi 1.1 Released

    Links for the day



  23. A Farce of a System: How SIPO, USPTO, and Increasingly the EPO Too Turn Into Filing Systems (No Proper Examination/Filtering Required)

    A critique of the declining quality of patents in some of the world's biggest patent offices, where the aspiration seems to be neo-liberal in the economic sense



  24. Microsoft's 'Full Assault' on Android, Java, and GNU/Linux, Using Classic E.E.E. Tactics Again

    Another reminder of the fact that Microsoft is very active on the E.E.E. front, not just against GNU/Linux but also Android and Java



  25. More Rumours and Calls Surrounding Prospects of Microsoft Buying Canonical (Ubuntu and More)

    Taking some of Canonical's recent moves into account, some pundits not only think it's possible for Shuttleworth to choose Microsoft money over principles but also urge for this to happen



  26. [ES] El Nuevo Impulso Finánciado por Microsoft Para Reforzar las Patentes de Software en los EE.UU., Apoyado por los Sospechosos Usuales (La Sagrada Familia) Mientras que Microsoft Cada Vez Más Lucha Como Compañíá Productiva

    Una mirada al esfuérzo de trae una resurgencia de las patentes de software en los Estados Unidos (con un clarísimo rol de Microsoft en él) y la fundación/conf ianza de Microsoften las patentes de software como arma contr Linux/Android porque las ganancias de Windows se están secando y el Windows Phone está al borde del colápso



  27. Links 26/4/2016: Firefox 46.0, Thunderbird's Stewardship

    Links for the day



  28. Links 25/4/2016: Kodi 16.1, OpenStack Summit

    Links for the day



  29. New Microsoft-Funded Push to Make Software Patents Stronger in the US, Backed by the Usual Suspects as Microsoft Increasingly Struggles as a Producing Company

    A look at the effort to bring about a software patents resurgence to the US (with clear Microsoft role in it) and Microsoft's reliance on software patents as a weapon against Linux/Android because Windows profits dry up and Windows Phone is on the verge of collapse



  30. Patents Roundup: Marijuana Patents, Patent Satellites, Patent Trolls, Wars, and Merchants (Notably Lawyers)

    Various strands of news about patents, focused on issues raised in the latter half of last week


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