netscape-npl.html (11957B)
1 <!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> 2 <!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 --> 3 <!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html --> 4 <!--#set var="TAGS" value="essays licensing non-cpleft" --> 5 <!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" --> 6 <title>On the Netscape Public License 7 - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> 8 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/netscape-npl.translist" --> 9 <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> 10 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" --> 11 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE--> 12 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" --> 13 <div class="article reduced-width"> 14 <h2>On the Netscape Public License</h2> 15 16 <address class="byline">by <a href="https://www.stallman.org/">Richard 17 Stallman</a></address> 18 19 <div class="infobox" style="font-style: italic"><p> 20 The <a href="/philosophy/netscape-npl-old.html"> original version</a> 21 of this article was written in March 1998 about a draft of the NPL. 22 Our first article on the subject was 23 <a href="/philosophy/netscape.html">Netscape is considering making 24 the Netscape browser free software</a>.</p> 25 </div> 26 <hr class="thin" /> 27 28 <p> 29 The Netscape Public License, or NPL, as it was ultimately designed in 30 1998, is a free software license—but it has three major flaws. 31 One flaw sends a bad philosophical message, another puts the free 32 software community in a weak position, while the third creates a major 33 practical problem within the free software community. Two of the 34 flaws apply to the Mozilla Public License as well. Because of these 35 flaws, we urge that you not use the NPL or the MPL for your free 36 software.</p> 37 38 <h3>1. Not all users are equal</h3> 39 40 <p> 41 The first problem I noticed in the NPL was that it does not give 42 Netscape and the rest of us equal rights, as the GNU GPL does. Under 43 the NPL, we can use Netscape's code only as specified in the NPL, but 44 Netscape can use our changes in any way at all—even in 45 proprietary licensed versions of the software.</p> 46 47 <p> 48 The problem here is subtle, because this does not make the program 49 nonfree. It does not stop us from redistributing the program, or 50 from changing it; it does not deny us any particular freedom. 51 Considered from a purely pragmatic viewpoint, it may not look like a 52 problem at all.</p> 53 54 <p> 55 The problem lies in the deeper message embodied in this condition. It 56 denies the idea of cooperation among equals that our community rests 57 on, and says that working on a free program means contributing to a 58 proprietary software product. Those who accept this condition are 59 likely to be changed by it, and the change will not strengthen our 60 community.</p> 61 62 <p> 63 One proposed solution for this asymmetry is to put a time limit on 64 it—perhaps three or five years. That would be a big improvement, 65 because the time limit would deny the problematical deeper message.</p> 66 67 <p> 68 The practical effects of this condition are minimized by another 69 drawback of the NPL: it is not designed as a thorough copyleft. In 70 other words, it does not try very hard to ensure that modifications 71 made by users are available as free software.</p> 72 73 <p> 74 The MPL (Mozilla Public License) does <em>not</em> have this problem. 75 That is the principal difference between the MPL and the NPL.</p> 76 77 <h3>2. Not a copyleft</h3> 78 79 <p> 80 The NPL has the form of a copyleft; it explicitly says that all 81 modifications made by users must be released under the NPL. But this 82 applies only to modifications to the existing code—not to added 83 subroutines, if they are put in separate files. As a practical 84 matter, this means it is easy to make proprietary changes if you want 85 to: just put the bulk of your code into a separate file, and call the 86 collection a Larger Work. Only the subroutine calls added to the old 87 files will have to be released under the NPL, and they will not be 88 very useful on their own.</p> 89 90 <p> 91 The lack of real copyleft is not a catastrophe; it does not make the 92 software nonfree. For example, the X.org distribution terms do not 93 try to use copyleft at all, yet X.org is free software nonetheless. 94 BSD is also non-copylefted free software (although the older BSD terms 95 have a <a href="/licenses/bsd.html">serious drawback</a> and should 96 not be imitated—if you want to release non-copylefted free 97 software, please use the X.org terms instead). NPL-covered software 98 is also <a href="/philosophy/categories.html">free software</a> 99 without being copylefted, and this by itself does not make the NPL 100 worse than other non-copyleft free software license.</p> 101 102 <p> 103 However, while this is not catastrophic, it is nonetheless a drawback. 104 And because the NPL looks like a copyleft, some users may be confused 105 about it, and might adopt the NPL, thinking that they are obtaining 106 the benefits of copyleft for their software, when that is not the 107 case. To avoid this outcome, we will need to work hard to educate 108 people about an issue that is not easy to explain in a few words.</p> 109 110 <h3>3. Not compatible with the GPL</h3> 111 112 <p> 113 The most serious practical problem in the NPL is that it is 114 incompatible with the GNU GPL. It is impossible to combine 115 NPL-covered code and GNU GPL-covered code together in one program, not 116 even by linking separate object files or libraries; no matter how this 117 is done, it has to violate one license or the other.</p> 118 119 <p> 120 This conflict occurs because the GPL is serious about copyleft: it was 121 designed to ensure that all changes and extensions to a free program 122 must be free. So it does not leave a loophole for making changes 123 proprietary by putting them into a separate file. To close this 124 loophole, the GPL does not allow linking the copylefted program with 125 code that has other restrictions or conditions—such as the 126 NPL.</p> 127 128 <p> 129 Being incompatible with the GPL does not make a program nonfree; it 130 does not raise a fundamental ethical issue. But it is likely to 131 create a serious problem for the free software community, dividing the 132 code base into two collections that cannot be mixed. As a practical 133 matter, this problem is very important.</p> 134 135 <p> 136 Solving this by changing the GPL is possible, but that would entail 137 abandoning copyleft—which would do more harm than good. But it 138 is possible to solve this problem with a small change in the NPL. 139 (See below for a specific way of doing this.)</p> 140 141 <h3>4. A note about names</h3> 142 <p> 143 NPL stands for Netscape Public License, but GPL does not stand for GNU 144 Public License. The full name of our license is the GNU General 145 Public License, abbreviated GNU GPL. Sometimes people leave out the 146 word “GNU” and write just GPL.</p> 147 148 <p> 149 (This is not a problem, just a fact that you should know.)</p> 150 151 <h3>Conclusion</h3> 152 153 <p> 154 Since problem 3 is the most serious, I hope that people will politely 155 and rationally explain to Netscape the importance of solving it. 156 Solutions are available; they just have to decide to use them.</p> 157 158 <p> 159 Here is a possible way to permit linking NPL-covered code and 160 GPL-covered code together. It can be done by adding these two 161 paragraphs to the NPL:</p> 162 163 <pre> 164 A.1. You may distribute a Covered Work under the terms of the GNU 165 General Public License, version 2 or newer, as published by the 166 Free Software Foundation, when it is included in a Larger Work 167 which is as a whole distributed under the terms of the same 168 version of the GNU General Public License. 169 170 A.2. If you have received a copy of a Larger Work under the terms of a 171 version or a choice of versions of the GNU General Public 172 License, and you make modifications to some NPL-covered portions 173 of this Larger Work, you have the option of altering these 174 portions to say that their distribution terms are that version or 175 that choice of versions of GNU General Public License. 176 </pre> 177 <p> 178 This allows people to combine NPL-covered code with GPL-covered code, 179 and to distribute the combined work under the terms of the GNU GPL.</p> 180 181 <p> 182 It permits people to release modifications to such combined works 183 under the terms of the GNU GPL—but the easiest way to release 184 them is under the NPL.</p> 185 186 <p> 187 When people take advantage of A.2, their changes will be released only 188 under the terms of the GNU GPL; so these changes would not be 189 available for Netscape to use in proprietary versions. It makes sense 190 that Netscape would see this as unfortunate.</p> 191 192 <p> 193 However, the NPL gives proprietary software developers an easy way to 194 make their changes entirely unavailable to Netscape—by putting 195 their code into separate files and calling the combination a Larger 196 Work. In fact, this is easier, for them, than A.2 is for GPL 197 users.</p> 198 199 <p> 200 If Netscape feels it can live with the trouble of (effectively) 201 proprietary modifications, surely the trouble of GPL-covered 202 modifications is small by comparison. If Netscape believes that 203 practical considerations will encourage most of the proprietary 204 software world to release its changes back to Netscape, without being 205 compelled to, the same reasons ought to apply in the free software 206 world as well. Netscape should recognize that this change is 207 acceptable, and adopt it, to avoid confronting free software 208 developers with a serious dilemma.</p> 209 </div> 210 211 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> 212 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> 213 <div id="footer" role="contentinfo"> 214 <div class="unprintable"> 215 216 <p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to 217 <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. 218 There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> 219 the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent 220 to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> 221 222 <p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, 223 replace it with the translation of these two: 224 225 We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality 226 translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection. 227 Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard 228 to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> 229 <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> 230 231 <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of 232 our web pages, see <a 233 href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations 234 README</a>. --> 235 Please see the <a 236 href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations 237 README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations 238 of this article.</p> 239 </div> 240 241 <!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to 242 files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should 243 be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this 244 without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first. 245 Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the 246 document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the 247 document was modified, or published. 248 249 If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too. 250 Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying 251 years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable 252 year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including 253 being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system). 254 255 There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers 256 Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. --> 257 258 <p>Copyright © 1998, 1999, 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p> 259 260 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" 261 href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative 262 Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p> 263 264 <!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" --> 265 266 <p class="unprintable">Updated: 267 <!-- timestamp start --> 268 $Date: 2021/09/05 09:34:35 $ 269 <!-- timestamp end --> 270 </p> 271 </div> 272 </div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include --> 273 </body> 274 </html>