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

Re: The APSL and Export Controls

According to Jules Bean:
> On Mon, 29 Mar 1999, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > Jules:
> > > Must!  I *must* notify apple by filling out the form.  If I can't,
> > > for any of the reasons I suggested above, I cannot distribute the
> > > derived work.
> > 
> > If Apple fails to make the given web site available, then it is
> > failing to enforce the notification clause.  That doesn't mean you
> > can't distribute, it just means that the notification clause is in
> > abeyance until Apple puts the site back up.
> It's not.  Failure to enforce would be not chasing me up if I made a
> violation.  Failing to provide the web page is something else entirely.

I see your point.
OK, let's assume that 'enforcement' isn't involved.

> And there's nothing in that contract which obliges apple to do so.

They're entering into a contract with you.  A "reasonable man"
standard applies to contract law, IIRC.  If Apple have made it
impossible to comply with a part of the contract, they can't come
back and complain, now can they?

> > And Apple doesn't specify a time line for notification, either.
> I would say it does.  It says that I 'may deploy covered code' *if* I
> 'notify Apple'..'by filling out'..

Sure, but does it say "by _first_ filling out?"

> I interpret that as, until I fill out that form, I have no right to deploy
> the code.

Again using a 'reasonable man' standard, I don't think that's
necessarily true.  Could Apple possibly complain if you deploy change
today and report them next week, *especially* if the delay in
reporting is their own fault?  If they did so, the complaint would be
entirely specious -- which means they just don't like you, in which
case they don't need the APSL as an excuse.

I don't think this is a plausible threat to developers.  Besides, just
think of the negative PR in the very community they're trying to reach
out to.  It's unreasonable, IMO, to fear this sort of attack.

> Note that this is *extremely* inconvienient, since every single trivial
> patch-bump on my code requires me to first notify apple.  If I have a
> public-access CVS server, every single check-in...

As I read the license, you're in compliance if you simply report to
Apple how to access the anonymous CVS repository with your evolving
copy of Darwin.
Chip Salzenberg      - a.k.a. -      <chip@perlsupport.com>
      "When do you work?"   "Whenever I'm not busy."

Reply to: