Re: squeak licence
Kurt Gramlich wrote:
Michele writes on the french skolelinux list:
Je me suis renseigne auprs de Stephane Ducasse pour savoir si
Squeak est Libre ou pas.
[....]
Squeak est un projet open-source
on peut
- lire ***tout*** le code
- modifier ***tout*** le code
- developper des logiciels professionnels et etre paye sans rien devoir
- distribuer des applications developpees en Squeak
Squeak is an open source project
you are allowed
- read the complett code
- modificate the complett code
- develop professional software and be payed without ??
- spread the applications builded on Squeak
La license est la license Squeak-L
The licence is described
http://www.squeak.org/about/index.html
Les fonts que utilisent squeak ne sont plus sous license apple a
partir de la version 3.7 ou 3.8
The fonts used by squeak are no more under licence of apple after
version 3.8
Thank you Kurt for your translation.
My 0.02 EUR regarding the licence:
* The licence is at http://www.squeak.org/download/license.html
* The licence there seems just to be the old unchanged Apple lincence.
* The licence does NOT reflect the mentioned freedom of the new fonts.
* The main part of the licence -- apart from making Squeak 'free' -- is
to protect Apple from any liabilites.
* The licence CANNOT be modified without written permission from Apple
(§9 of lincence text) although the very same licence text seems to
grant the possibility to sublicence the software under modified licences
as long as the rights and protections of Apple are not restricted (§2).
* Modifications, if distributed, have to be published.
Modifications of Apples fonts are not allowed.
_So_far_ without the fonts / with other fonts Squeak is Free Software.
But maybe not really, as there seem to be at least two problematic clauses
regarding DFSG [ http://www.debian.org/social_contract.en.html#guidelines ]:
a) The licence forbids to give Squeak away for money, i.e. forbids selling,
as long as Apples fonts are included (§2 and "Exhibit A")
With Apples fonts included this conflicts with DFSG §1.
OK, now non-Apple fonts seem to be used, so in this combination its
free. But that doesnt change the licence.
DFSG §1: "The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from
selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate
software distribution containing programs from several different sources.
The license may not require a royalty or other fee for such sale."
b) The licence forbids to give "Apple Software" away to people belonging
to nations to which the U.S.[A.] restrict exports to. (§6)
As long as the original Apple licence is used for Squeak it remains
"Apple Software".
IMHO this results in conflict with DFSG §1 and DFSG §5 (see below).
DFSG §5: "The license must not discriminate against any person or group of
persons."
In my view a modified licence is needed. But the creation of a suitable
new licence text seems to be a delicate issue...
§2 states: "... You may distribute and sublicense such Modified Software
only under the terms of a valid, binding license that makes no
representations or warranties on behalf of Apple, and is no less
protective of Apple and Apple's rights than this License. ..."
whereas §9 states: "... No amendment to or modification of this License
will be binding unless in writing and signed by Apple."
So the hairsplitting question is: Does dropping the §9 part diminish
the protection of Apple and Apples rights?
IANAL; and who wants to take in on with Apples lawyers? ;-)
In the end i'd really prefer a Squeak licence for Squeak and not the
Apple [Software] licence. :-/
Best wishes and kind regards,
Patrick
--
The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be
a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the
safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
-- http://bash.org/?4753
Reply to: