Wow. Since June 1991, we’ve seen this in copyright notices in plenty of free software projects:

GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE

Version 2, June 1991

And today, that changed to:

GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE

Version 3, 29 June 2007

I am somehow doubtful that version 3 will also last 16 years. The GPL has been adapted to suite current problems which will (hopefully) not be an issue anymore 10 years from now. I also predict that we’ll have much more diverse software by then, and also better standards, and new problems that will have to be addressed.

Read the full license here, today. So that you can tell your grandchildren one day that you read it on that license date

More or less 24 hours from now, we’ll have a brand new GNU General Public License. No matter how you look at it, it’s an important milestone for the free software community. It may affect which kernel(s) (and other software) we use in the future, it may have effects on business models for companies who use free software, and it may even have an effect on current patent and copyright laws world wide.

From the FSF announcement:

On Friday, June 29, at 12 noon (EDT), the Free Software Foundation will officially release the GNU GPL version 3. Please join us in celebration as we bring to a close eighteen months of public outreach and comment, in revision of the world's most popular free software license.

Beyond the creation of an improved license, the process of drafting version 3 has helped highlight vital issues for the community of free software users. This is a moment to thank the thousands who participated by commenting on the license, and those that represented stakeholders through the GPLv3 committee process.

Now with the release of GPLv3, we will see new defenses extended to free software. These defenses will continue the long history of fighting all efforts to make free software proprietary.

Please join us as we stream live footage of Richard Stallman announcing GPLv3 from Noon (EDT) at www.fsf.org.

Also, a big congratulations to Benjamin “mako” Hill for his appointment on the FSF board of directors! I think the young blood will only do them good.

His name is Eleon Israel, also known as “Eli”. Earlier this week, he decided to disobey direct orders and refused to participate further in the war in Iraq (Full story from ivaw.org):

“Yesterday, June 19, 26 year old SPC Eli Israel put himself at great personal risk by making the courageous decision to refuse further participation in the U.S. occupation of Iraq. Eli told his commanding officer and sergeants that he will no longer be a combatant in this illegal, unjustified war.”

Now that’s what I call a true hero. We need more people in the world that talk and act against that which is wrong. I have some American friends, and whenever I make a hint about how treacherous or tyrannous their leader is, they are usually quick to tell me that the U.S. is a very divided country, and that it’s only half the country that supports him, and that they don’t necessarily agree with everything that Bush does or says.

Well, tough shit. If half the country is content with letting George Bush get away with whatever he’s doing, even if they didn’t vote for him, then I classify them in the same league as those who allowed Apartheid to happen and did nothing about it. Once Apartheid was over, many blissfully claimed that they weren’t involved with it and never supported it. I say that they are lying. There was probably quite a lot they could do. If they were white and over 18, they could’ve voted for a party that was more liberal. They could’ve spoken out against Apartheid, and spread awareness about the terrible things our government was doing at the time. I say that those who stood by and allowed crimes against humanity too take place were also guilty.

The same goes for the Americans who let Bush get away with so much. If you’re one of those who think that it’s OK to do nothing, then you’re wrong. Bad things happen when good people do nothing, Eli is one of the good Americans, and I salute him. I hope that more Americans will follow his example.

For those who haven’t quite caught up, last year Microsoft signed a broad-collaboration deal with Novell that included a patent covenant. Since then, Xandros, Samsung Electronics, LG Electronics, and now also Linspire, another Linux development and support company.

I wouldn’t be surprised if they target the cellular handset manufacturers as well. Both Nokia and Motorola have a lot invested in Linux as a platform, and they have existing agreements with Microsoft, so they would be easy targets.

Today, Aaron Toponce, and Richard Johnson (both Ubuntu members), urged Mark Shuttleworth (founder of Ubuntu), to make a public statement about where Ubuntu and Canonical stands with regards to Microsofts new partnerships.

In a recent interview, Mark was asked whether he would sign such an agreement, and his response was:

“No, absolutely not. But the time will come when the folks at Microsoft who have a clear vision for the company as a participant in this community, rather than as a hostile antagonist, will win. At that point I’d love to work with Microsoft. It’s not an evil empire. It’s just a company that is efficiently grounded in the 1980s. New leadership and new thinking might make it a more effective partner for us.”

By that, I understand that Mark has already stated that there won’t be a Microsoft-Ubuntu cross-patent deal. Mark has also previously expressed that he is against software patents. It does sound like he’s quite keen to be doing work with Microsoft though, and I don’t think that’s necassarily a bad thing, as long as Ubuntu doesn’t give Microsoft more FUD mud, I think I’ll be fine with that.

However, what IF Ubuntu would sign a patent covenant with Microsoft? Would I still advocate Ubuntu? I honestly can’t say. I certainly won’t like it, and I admit that I would also feel more comfortable if Canonical would make a statement on where they stand on this. I have lots of trust in the Ubuntu project though, and I’m very confident that the right choices will be made.