....... Capital wasn't what the system required to operate. What it required to operate was proof of concept, and it could be scratched. Running code - something that began scratching the itch, however badly, and a community of people who wanted to see it through.

So what GPL3 meant was, proof of concept + running code + presence of community. The concept had been proven already, by GPL2. That is, the substantive concept - we could make a set of rules for sharing that would make it possible to produce software all around the world that would be of ultimately high value, but could be offered to anyone free of charge - and provided with immense freedom to study, modify, and share.

There was running code - we worked very hard for almost 2 years to produce a first discussion draft of GPL3, which we unveiled on January 18th of 2006 at MIT - and there was a community; many communities, in fact. But their convocation for the purpose of legislation was a unique event. Every other week for the past 18 months, we've convened a conference call of 21 of the largest IT Vendors in the world. Those companies, whose names are household familiar in every household and business familiar in every business.

Working in teams that varied from one person from some of the companies, to five or six in others. Carefully studying every single word, commenting as though their lives depended upon it - as in some of the businesses they did. On every detail of the license's functioning in the global IT economy. We also convened, every other week, a conversation among 24 of the largest users of software in the world. Banks and brokerages, government agencies, and the lawyers who acquire software on their behalf.

We consulted every single week with the leadership of large free software projects around the world, some of whom use GPL and some of whom only interact with GPLd code. We spoke to hackers of enormous influence in the community, influence they have gained by their skill in programming and by their willingness to share. By their selflessness in helping others learn, and by the extraordinary wit and intellect whereby they have produced miracles out of thin air for all of us to use for years.

We conducted public meetings on every continent, save Antarctica. We negotiated ceaselessly with people over what they needed, what they wanted, what they doubted, what they feared, what their concerns were, and in the end - that's now I'm speaking of, this week, between now and Friday, the license gets itself finished and comes out the door as a final product - in the end, we got agreement. We got consensus. Those who predicted at the beginning of this process that it would dissolve into flame wars, or bad netiquette, or some screeching meltdown benefiting only the monopolists were wrong.

I admit that there were days when I feared that they might be right - it was no cakewalk - but everyone who engages in legislation knows that it's never a cakewalk, and almost never pretty. What is interesting about the legislative experience we've just gone through is how little of it, however, had the ultimate ugliness of legislation as we know it in the public sphere.

............

This is only the gist of the talk, read the full transcript http://jeremiad.org/moglentext.shtml

Cheers Praveen