[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: The APSL and Export Controls

According to Jules Bean:
> 2.2(c) is an unpleasant restriction, which probably violates (does
> violate, IMO) point 3 of the DFSG.

We understand the unpleasantness to some of 2.2(c), but we don't think
that it violates the OSD.

> You cannot distribute modified works under the same terms as the
> license on the original software - you must first notify Apple, on a
> particular web-page.

You need to look more carefully at the difference between the patch
and the derived work.  The derived work _may_ be distributed under
original terms.  Only the patch must be uploaded to Apple; if Apple's
web site is down, that item is unenforceable and thus void until the
web site is back up.

> What do you do if you don't have access to the internet?  If
> accessing the internet costs you $100?

Improvise.  In practical terms, Apple won't care if you use a slow
method of publication like, say, mailing a floppy disk to a friend who
has a cheap connection.

> In any event, you must be of majority age and otherwise competent to enter
> into contracts to accept this license.
> fails DFSG point (5).

In our opinion, it doesn't.  It isn't discrimination to require that a
contract be entered into by only those competent to do so.  OTOH, I
think it might be useful for Apple to drop it, since there's no point
in repeating law-of-the-land in contract language.

Thanks for the reply.
Chip Salzenberg      - a.k.a. -      <chip@perlsupport.com>
      "When do you work?"   "Whenever I'm not busy."

Reply to: