CeCILL: La Licence Francaise Du Logiciel Libre

News for nerds writes "Researchers at three French government-funded research organizations revealed the new Open-Source license, known as CeCILL (English .pdf here), which they say is compatible with the FSF's GPL. CeCILL is intended to make free software more compatible with French law in two areas where it differs significantly from U.S. law: copyright and product liability. I, for one, welcome our nouvelle overlord of freedom."

Comments

Re:I suspect...

[JanneM]

Different legal system, so you need to adapt the license for it.

It's funny (as in sad "funny") that americans seem to think that others dislike them a lot more than people really do. Of course, as some parts of the US have acted out on that misrepresentation the past few years, they are at serious risk of making it self-fulfilling.

Re:I suspect...

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

I suspect they just want a "GPL" of their own that doesn't come from those "stupid Americains" ...

Okay, I shouldn't feed the trolls, but...

Yes, you're right: many french people do think "stupide Americians". Most software developers don't however, simply because they deal with other developers from all countries in the world on a regular basis. But if a Franco-French GPL is what it takes to further the cause of free software in the eyes of the general population and in courts, why not? I'm all for it.

This is about developing free software, not about your stupid france-vs-america bull. If you can't talk about developing free software without communicating your totally unrelated biases, then please don't.

Accepted before seen?

[maxwell demon]

Section 3.1 states:

The licensee shall be deemed as having accepted the terms and conditions of this Agreement by the occurrence of the first of the following events:

- (i) loading the Software by any or all means, notably, by downloading from a remote server, or by loading from a physical medium;

[...]

I consider this part problematic. After all, when you start downloading the software, you may not be able to detect the licence, and therefore how should yoi agree to it? IMHO a license should never be assumed to be agreed on until you had at least the chance to see it. Moreover, what about dual-licensed software? Say, a software comes both under this license and under the GPL, and I want to agree to the GPL only?

OTOH I like the following part:

Otherwise, the Licensor grants to the Licensee free of charge exploitation rights on the patents he holds on whole or part on the inventions implemented in the Software

Note that there's no limitation of that clause to software derived from the licensed one, which IMHO means as soon as I accepted this license for a specific piece of software, I'm entitled to use all the licensor's patents covering that code freely in any project, even those not derived from this (i.e. basically the licensor is completely opening up the patents used in that code). However IANAL, and also I fear that this will be refined before any real software is licensed with this.

(BTW, it sucks not having Copy&paste enabled in that PDF)

Re:Accepted before seen?

[plaa]

The licensee shall be deemed as having accepted the terms and conditions of this Agreement by the occurrence of the first of the following events:

- (i) loading the Software by any or all means, notably, by downloading from a remote server, or by loading from a physical medium;

Even without the download clause, what I don't like about this license is that you have to accept it. The GPL specifically says that to use the software, you do not need to accept the GPL:

5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License.

That's a major part I like in the GPL - it's not an EULA (though some programs stupidly splash it in your face with an "I Accept" button the first time the program is run). If you don't like it, you can still use the software. It's only if you wish to do things normally forbidden by law (copying, modifying) that you have to accept the GPL.

French bashing

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not French but I'm getting tired of the jokes that are made each time something about France is published here. The French reading this site are often just coders that share our same spirit of OS and Linux and such.

The jokes are often funny and the criticism is okay. Just not on every single subject that touches France.

Re:French bashing

[ajs318]

People who think the French are arrogant probably just have not tried speaking to them in their own language.

The French are a wonderfully polite race. All they ask is that you make some sort of effort to fit in with their culture and their language. It's their country, and they feel they have a right to expect it of you. Even if it is only just saying "Bonjour" [hello], "J'en veux comme celui-la, s'il vous plait" [I want one like that, please] and "Ou est la toilette?" [Where is the toilet?]

Once you have indicated that you are making at least some small token attempt, then you will be treated to the usual Continental hospitality. Speak English to a Frenchman in France, though, and you have just earned yourself an enemy for life.

Re:French bashing

[zoloto]

the problem with American's doing this in the USA, is that we're seen as "unaccomodating" and rude not to cater to "special needs" on a constant basis.

I say speak the language of the country you're living in. It's official language, and properly as best you can.

This bi,tri-lingual shiz really gets annoying to a great many people. If you live here, speak "American" please! If not, at least get your green card/citizenship before you bitch about things!

It does help to speak the language of the country you live in, or visit. At least make an attempt to learn some basics or "small phrases" so people know what the hell you're talking about. Not just in the USA but EVERYWHERE! /end_rant

Re:French bashing

[Anonymous Coward]

those two women were probably bald around august 1944.

Re:French bashing

[Idarubicin]

I say speak the language of the country you're living in. It's official language, and properly as best you can.

This bi,tri-lingual shiz really gets annoying to a great many people. If you live here, speak "American" please! If not, at least get your green card/citizenship before you bitch about things!

Hm. Why does it get annoying? Some other people speak other languages. Shrug. Worried about the cost of offering government services in other languages? Yep--it costs money. Probably would cost more money to leave people sick and cold if doctors, lawyers, shopkeepers, and teachers decided not to speak to them.

A lot of countries are successfully bi- and even tri-lingual (in that all government business is conducted in all of the 'official' langauges) while providing support where appropriate in dozens of other languages.

Also, a great many people for whom English is not a first language may well have green cards or full citizenship. They should be perfectly welcome to petition the government to fund multilingual services--there are lots of English-speaking special interest groups that receive funding for their pet projects; most of those are probably quite a bit smaller than the number of speakers of Spanish, or Cantonese, or French in the United States.

Even if they speak functional English, many people may be more comfortable conducting business or dealing with the government in their first language. I can write legibly with my left hand, but I know that for important documents I want to use my right--this is a similar situation. Similarly, I can muddle through government documents in French (I live in Canada) but I much prefer the English version. If I were an immigrant, I'd hope that I could do things like apply for a drivers' license or ask about income taxes in my own language, just to be sure that I correctly understood the rules.

What is "American"? In some parts of the United States, large areas probably speak more Spanish than English--should services in English be optional? Should service in Spanish be forbidden, since the majority of the country speaks English? Should we consider it hypocritical to criticize regimes elsewhere that deliberately suppress minority languages and cultures if such a policy were brought forth?

Incidentally, the first sentence quoted contains several grammatical errors, including the ever-popular superfluous apostrophe in the possessive its. I presume that the parent poster is a native speaker of English, who has been educated in that langauge and immersed in its use since birth. If the parent still doesn't use the English language correctly, is it fair to expect its exclusive and immediate adoption by all new immigrants?

Re:When ideologies clash

[Anonymous Coward]

France des not respect freedom?
France is a totalitarian state?
In relation to what? What are you trolling about?

Re:Necessary?

[orzetto]

Don't say this aloud, but the GPL is not worth the bits it's written on in France. The FSF states very good reasons not to translate the GPL in other languages, but in France if a contract is not in French, it's not worth anything. There is a law about this, maybe someone will provide a link (sorry my French is not that good).

I was told this by people that have been working on the subject---I help out the KDE-i18n-it team, and the issue of translating the GPL surfaces every now and then, and one point made is what I reported here.

I would really like to know whether this separate licence you mention is in French, any chances you find it?

Re:About time

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think so. The GPL demands no discrimination is applied on those who may use it. What you propose is discrimination (although arguably positive discrimination). IANAL.

Re:About time

[Hadriven]

What's interesting about this licence is that is has been written by institutions close from the french government - the CEA are strongly bound to it because they're the ones in charge, AFAIK, of both military and civilian nuclear technology, and the CNRS and INRIA are well-known national research institutes.

IANAL, but I'm quite sure such a licence is something that may potentially be taken seriously by courts, at least in France. If only because of its apparently complex french lawyerspeak... And because of its origins, probably way more serious from the perspective of a judiciary system than a licence written by a group of idealists in a country where laws aren't the same, and in a different language. As some more or less explicitly pointed here, licence translations aren't that good - I guess the potentially ambiguous nature and abusive lexical complexity of lawyerspeak aren't something that is easily translateable.

Now, there is something in the press release that may make some cringe. Here's a fairly literal translation of a snippet in this release :
This licence is the first of a family intended to develop itself along principles characterizing other very used licences
At the end of this sentence is written a small superscript 2 that sends to a footnote whose meaning goes as follows :
Namely the LGPL (Lesser General Public Licence), QPL (Q Public Licence) and BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) licences.
I'll let you ponder on whether BSD's a free licence...

- Hadriven

Re:Differnt languages in different countries

[Scarblac]

Oddly enough, because of Slashdot, I know much more about US copyright law than about EU/Dutch law (I am Dutch). So I could be wrong.

But anyway, if the GPL isn't valid for some reason, then I would think that it is just void, no matter where you are. And yes, then the Berne convention applies - you have to get permission from the author to copy any copyrighted work. There's no reason why it would suddenly be free for all, just because there's an invalid license associated with it.

Re:I suspect...

[renoX]

Well as a French, I agree that some people are jealous of the fact that some americans are very rich, but French don't hate Americans because of their fatness, make fun yes (and even not too loud because we have also the problem..), hate no.

Anyway, the "hate" is more linked to Americans being perceived as being arrogant: "American's imperialism" is the major reason.
The recent war with Irak is a good example of this domination in action: America wants to go to war with Irak, show unconvincing proof to NATA and when told that these proof are not convincing enough, goes to war alone..
That is what French people hate about Americans.

here we go

[Ari_Haviv]

Just what we need: more politics and less quality code. There is no freedom with fragmentation. Microsoft will continue to dominate the computer industry until opponents try to unify

French bashing justified??? Perhaps.

[zoloto]

It goes without saying, even in many of the other European countries I have visited recently, that the french have an arrogance about them that the USA can not even be compared to.

I don't say this to bash the french, or your comment (as it is a respectable opinion) however, in many instances throughout many aspects of the French economy, politics or culture, there is an "arrogance". It may be a cultural style of isolationism... but whatever you call it - it's prevelant in the medical industry (at times) and most notably technology, partly becaues of ignorance of technology and it's applications (like many other countries, even my own USA).

This is what I've noticed. My perspective is obviously going to be different. But I've traveled the globe for business and for pleasure. This "arrogance" (so quoted because it is the closest word I can't render at the moment), is noted and generally seen throughout neighboring countries and associated countries that are tied economically, socially or otherwise.

If I am wrong, I do apologise. This is only what one man, one slashdotter has noticed and observed throughout the world of business, medicine, economics and technology. But I hope this may either calm you in being offended. After all... they are only my observations.

Hope this may help.

Re:French bashing justified??? Perhaps.

[perly-king-69]

I live on the other side of La Manche and visit our French neighbours quite often.

I think the whole arrogance thing is overblown. Yes Parisian waiters are arrogant - you expect that. But by and large they're just regular people trying to get by in the world just like most people. You find some friendly people, some @$$holes. Same everywhere you go.

It's no different to American tourists in London. The knee-jerk reaction is that they're just a bunch of fat, loud, obnoxious Yanks. But I bet some of them are really nice friendly people!

No, that wasn't a troll. Don't mod it as such.

Re:French bashing justified??? Perhaps.

[jandersen]

By the same token you could say that Americans deserve the hatred that comes their way. And many would agree - the impression that is prevalent in most countries outside America seems to be that you guys are terminally superficial, heavyhanded beyond any anything merited by the situation, infinitely selfish, wasteful and equipped with the narrowest tunnel vision know to mankind.

But would it be reasonable to say that 'this is the way Americans are' just because your government and military are like that?

Remember - you guys started on the nonsense with 'freedom fries', 'surrender monkeys' and 'France's mini-me'. You never heard any French officials blurt out that kind of drivel. Probably too arrogant to stoop that low.

Re:French bashing justified??? Perhaps.

[killbill!]

As a Frenchman myself, I have to agree. When I was in high school in Germany, we had French school books (designed by French people to teach French to foreigners) that were basically saying France is not only about pleasure of all kinds, it also is a major hi-tech nation
They went on showing major French tech achievements: the TGV (French bullet train), the Airbus, and the Ariane rocket.

Not a single word was spoken about the fact that THREE OTHER NATIONS were involved in the Airbus project, not to mention SIXTEEN in the Ariane project.

On that very day, it finally dawned on me why so many people hated us and yet most of us didn't even know it.

Or consider the French European policy. The French government has grown so used to treating the EU as a modern-day colonial empire that it was shocked when most European governments turned their back to it at the first chance they could get - namely supporting the Iraq war, even though it'd mean contempting international law and alienating voters.

OTOH, quite the same thing can be said about the USA. I guess it is related to the fact both countries consider themselves as models to be followed.

Re:French bashing justified??? Perhaps.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business."

The arrogance of american nationalism is, and will always be, unmatched.

Re:French bashing justified??? Perhaps.

[griblik]

Personally, as another islander, I'd have to say that in my experience, a fair percentage of the population of Paris are arrogant bastards.

But then, I'd also say that a fair percentage of Londoners are obnoxious wankers with their own share of arrogance. Not for nothing do the residents of London enjoy a certain reputation around the rest of the country.

I wouldn't call either group representative of the general population of their countries though. Most of the French people I've met here or in France have been genuinely nice, friendly people. Same goes for the 'fat loud obnoxious yanks' mentioned earlier - most Americans are decent interesting people.

There just seems to be something about living in large cities that destroys people's consideration for others. Nothing to do with the country...

Re:French bashing justified??? Perhaps.

[vidarh]

In my experience, this has nothing to do with the French being arrogant, and everything to do with dislike for the sterotypes of American tourists. As a Norwegian I've never experienced any arrogance from French people.

However I have witnessed how American tourists often gets treated both in the UK and in France, often because they are perceived as loud, obnoxious and entirely without manners. Sometimes it might be true, but just as often it is a case of cultural mismatches.

I think the main reasons Americans apparently don't see people in the UK as arrogant too is that the French are amazing at making their dislike for something extremely in your face, combined with larger cultural differences.

The British on the other hand will, when offended, either use insults that the average American don't quite "get", or will smear it on thick with dry sarcasm that tends to pass straight over the heads of the stereotypical obnoxious US tourist...

These kind of cultural mismatches have nothing to do with peoples real attitudes. For some other examples - when I started dealing with Americans and to some extent other English speaking people in conjunction with work years ago I realised that I would often be perceived as rude because of the way I was used to speak.

In Norwegian you would often be very direct and informal and you use very few phrases that would be considered normal courtesy in other languages. It's very easy to carry artefacts like that over when you speak a foreign language. When Norwegians are being taught French and German it's drilled into your head that you need to watch it because you can really piss some (particularly older people) off, but for English it's often considered a lot less important, possibly because the differences are a lot more subtle.

I still find it weird when people address me "sir" in shops in London for instance, while using the equivalent term in Norwegian would either get you a weird stare or people would possibly take it as an insult (as it could imply you were suggesting they were being snotty and arrogant).

In the same vein my fiance (who is Nigerian) finds it extremely awkward to address my mother and grandparents by first name, being used to having to use courtesy terms or at least last name, while again either would be considered at best weird, at worst rude in Norway (because you'd be indicating that you're distancing yourself from someone, which is a sign of respect many places but would these days more often be interpreted as dislike or disinterest in Norway where the norm is to use firstnames in almost all situations).

One of the other mismatches I often come across where I've both thought people were being rude and had people consider me rude is the (mostly US) thing with asking someone how things are going without expecting a response. Before I knew, I considered it extremely rude when I'd meet an American who'd ask me how things were going, and then keep walking past me without waiting for a response. At the same time, I soon realised that I'd sometimes be preceived as rude for starting to talk about how I was doing instead of answering by asking how they were doing.

Is French a big language?

[Anonymous Coward]

Although I don't speak French, that licence seems a bit long to me. How many words does it take to say something like this:

Copyright (c) 2004 Joe Bloggs

Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any
purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above
copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

in French?

Re:Is French a big language?

[TheRaven64]

If you want a free license that grants recipients of your code the right to do anything they want with it, make it public domain. If you want credit for writing the code, use a BSD or MIT license. If you want to push an agenda, then use huge pile of legalese that is the GPL.

Personally, I'd rather people continued to contribute changes to open source projects because they considered the existence of good open source software to be beneficial to themselves, rather than because they were forced to by the GPL, but then I still have some faith left in humanity.

Interesting GPL compatibility

[JPS]

What strikes me in this licence is the way the claim to be compatible with the GPL. Essentially, it say that the CeCILL licence can be "transformed" into the GPL if a CeCILL licenced software uses of includes a GPL piece of software.

This seems somewhat weird as it seems to imply that all CeCILL licence code can easily be transformed into GPL, thus removing all the specificies and french-law related subtelties of the original licence ...

Re:Differnt languages in different countries

[suffe]

As have been stated over and over again, the GPL gives rights, it does not remove them. In other words, if it is indeed non-valid, due to language related reasons or other, then the source is simply a document with copyright applied to it. No need to get all nervous and paranoid.

Re:I suspect...

[hdparm]

'Arrogant' is a remark I hear all my life about Americans and French alike. What a load of crock. There's what - ~300 M people in these two countries and all of them are arrogant? Your comment, on the other hand, makes you (at best) ignorant.

What about Article 13.2?

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

13.2 In the absence of an out-of-court settlement within (2) months as from their occurrence, and unless emergency proceeding are necessary, the disagreements or disputes shall be referred to the Paris Courts having jurisdiction, by the first party to take action.

Does this mean companies can rob French OSS, and then force the creator to haul his ass to Paris to stop them? Or dows it just mean he has to get his ass to a fench law court? Either way some OSS writers may not be able to travel.

Also considering the agreement requires the matter to be taken to a French court with jurisdiction, won't that mean that US, UK or other compnaies who breach it won't be held liable as they were outside the juristiction of any French court?

Vive le difference.

Re:Differnt languages in different countries

[Raffaello]

Software is not ice cream.

1. If I give you the right to use, modify, and redistribute my code, I do not thereby lose the right to use, modify, and redistribute my code. This is not true of ice cream, as you pointed out, one of the many ways in which ice cream is a really bad analogy for software.

2. Without applying any license whatsoever, any code I write is protected under the Berne Convention and local copyright laws (in my case, U.S.). These copyright laws give you no rights to copy, modify or redistribute my code, with the very narrow exception of fair use - you may quote very limited portions in a review, critique, or scholarly article.

3. The GPL gives, in addition, further rights, to copy, modify and redistribute my code (if I license it under the GPL). The GPL places some restrictions only on these further rights . The GPL does not place any restriction on any rights you already have under copyright law. For example, the GPL does not place any restrictions on your existing fair use rights. I defy you to find any restriction in the GPL on rights you already have under copyright law . Good luck; you won't find any.

4. Conclusion: You have a profound misunderstanding of what rights you have to the use of my copyrighted work . You don't have the right to copy it in whole. You may only copy very small portions, and then only for the purpose of review, critique, teaching, or scholarly debate. You do not have the right to use my copyrighted work without my express permission, usually for a fee, which I, not you, determine. You do not have the right to redistribute my work. The GPL grants you these additional rights, but places some restrictions on only these additional rights. The GPL places no restrictions whatsoever on any rights you already have under copyright law without the GPL.

law (not license) is interpreted differently

[Xtifr]

You are mistaken on this point. The FSF does not interpret the GPL to mean anything about linkage. The FSF interprets copyright law as saying that linkage constitutes copyright derivation. You may disagree, but that doesn't change the fact that the GPL is solely a defense against charges of copyright violation!

If you violate the GPL, then the GPL no longer applies to you. But accepting the GPL is voluntary. If what you do with the GPL'd code is not violating copyright law, then the GPL is irrelevant, and you can argue that you never accepted it. If what you do with the GPL'd code does violate copyright law, then your only possible defense is that the GPL granted you the right to do what you did (which is only true if you adhered to its terms). But the GPL can never take away rights, by definition, because it exists solely as a defense against charges of copyright violation. If there is no possibility of copyright infringement, the GPL is moot.