Re: Apple's APSL 2.0 " Debian Free Software Guidelines"-compliant?
Ryan Rasmussen wrote:
> Is the following compliant with Debian's Free Software Guidelines?
No. It seems pretty close, but there are a few deadly clauses. Gah, this
is a lawyerly monstrosity....
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> APPLE PUBLIC SOURCE LICENSE
> Version 2.0 - August 6, 2003
<snip>
So, in the part I snipped, it grants most of the right rights. However, it
has a *lot* of patent language, and I'm not quite sure exactly what it
grants in that regard.
> 9. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. TO THE EXTENT NOT PROHIBITED BY LAW, IN NO
> EVENT SHALL APPLE OR ANY CONTRIBUTOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY INCIDENTAL,
> SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING
> TO THIS LICENSE OR YOUR USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE COVERED CODE, OR
> ANY PORTION THEREOF, WHETHER UNDER A THEORY OF CONTRACT, WARRANTY,
> TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE), PRODUCTS LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE, EVEN IF
> APPLE OR SUCH CONTRIBUTOR HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
> DAMAGES AND NOTWITHSTANDING THE FAILURE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY
> REMEDY. SOME JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE LIMITATION OF LIABILITY OF
> INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, SO THIS LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY
> TO YOU. In no event shall Apple's total liability to You for all
> damages (other than as may be required by applicable law) under this
> License exceed the amount of fifty dollars ($50.00).
Is this OK? Probably, but I'm not clear.
> 10. Trademarks. This License does not grant any rights to use the
> trademarks or trade names "Apple", "Apple Computer", "Mac", "Mac OS",
> "QuickTime", "QuickTime Streaming Server" or any other trademarks,
> service marks, logos or trade names belonging to Apple (collectively
> "Apple Marks") or to any trademark, service mark, logo or trade name
> belonging to any Contributor.
This is good.
> You agree not to use any Apple Marks in
> or as part of the name of products derived from the Original Code or
> to endorse or promote products derived from the Original Code other
> than as expressly permitted by and in strict compliance at all times
> with Apple's third party trademark usage guidelines which are posted
> at http://www.apple.com/legal/guidelinesfor3rdparties.html.
This is not good, because it may go beyond trademark law. This is
acceptable if and only if Apple's trademark usage guidelines allow
everything which is normally permitted under trademark law. I think they
do, but the fact that they could change at any time may make this
unacceptable. This should be considered a fixable license bug, frankly.
<snip>
> 12. Termination.
>
> 12.1 Termination. This License and the rights granted hereunder will
> terminate:
>
> (a) automatically without notice from Apple if You fail to comply with
> any term(s) of this License and fail to cure such breach within 30
> days of becoming aware of such breach;
Fine.
>
> (b) immediately in the event of the circumstances described in Section
> 13.5(b); or
Fine.
>
> (c) automatically without notice from Apple if You, at any time during
> the term of this License, commence an action for patent infringement
> against Apple; provided that Apple did not first commence
> an action for patent infringement against You in that instance.
Not acceptable. Suppose you, a hardware designer, sue Apple for infringing
your microchip patent?
<snip>
> 13.1 Government End Users. The Covered Code is a "commercial item" as
> defined in FAR 2.101. Government software and technical data rights in
> the Covered Code include only those rights customarily provided to the
> public as defined in this License. This customary commercial license
> in technical data and software is provided in accordance with FAR
> 12.211 (Technical Data) and 12.212 (Computer Software) and, for
> Department of Defense purchases, DFAR 252.227-7015 (Technical Data --
> Commercial Items) and 227.7202-3 (Rights in Commercial Computer
> Software or Computer Software Documentation). Accordingly, all U.S.
> Government End Users acquire Covered Code with only those rights set
> forth herein.
What the heck does this do?
<snip>
> 13.4 Waiver; Construction. Failure by Apple or any Contributor to
> enforce any provision of this License will not be deemed a waiver of
> future enforcement of that or any other provision.
Yeah, that's fine.
> Any law or
> regulation which provides that the language of a contract shall be
> construed against the drafter will not apply to this License.
What the heck does this do? I don't like the look of it.
> 13.5 Severability. (a) If for any reason a court of competent
> jurisdiction finds any provision of this License, or portion thereof,
> to be unenforceable, that provision of the License will be enforced to
> the maximum extent permissible so as to effect the economic benefits
> and intent of the parties, and the remainder of this License will
> continue in full force and effect. (b) Notwithstanding the foregoing,
> if applicable law prohibits or restricts You from fully and/or
> specifically complying with Sections 2 and/or 3 or prevents the
> enforceability of either of those Sections, this License will
> immediately terminate and You must immediately discontinue any use of
> the Covered Code and destroy all copies of it that are in your
> possession or control.
>
> 13.6 Dispute Resolution. Any litigation or other dispute resolution
> between You and Apple relating to this License shall take place in the
> Northern District of California, and You and Apple hereby consent to
> the personal jurisdiction of, and venue in, the state and federal
> courts within that District with respect to this License. The
> application of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the
> International Sale of Goods is expressly excluded.
Choice-of-venue. Not OK.
> 13.7 Entire Agreement; Governing Law. This License constitutes the
> entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject
> matter hereof. This License shall be governed by the laws of the
> United States and the State of California, except that body of
> California law concerning conflicts of law.
>
> Where You are located in the province of Quebec, Canada, the following
> clause applies: The parties hereby confirm that they have requested
> that this License and all related documents be drafted in English. Les
> parties ont exige que le present contrat et tous les documents
> connexes soient rediges en anglais.
These are OK.
--
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Reply to: