Re: Dangerous precedent being set - possible serious violation o
Caspian writes:
> On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Seth David Schoen wrote:
>
> > This trend concerns me, too, but if you want to stop them, you will need
> > to show why what they are doing is not only nasty but also illegal.
> >
> > Remember that the DFSG _prohibits_ licenses from forbidding the use of
> > non-free software in a distribution.
>
> It does? This is rather disturbing news. Why does it do this?
You'd have to ask the people who wrote it. Bruce? :-)
I think it stems from a desire to make sure that free software is useful to
people who use non-free software. You could have a Free Software Holy War
License which tries to forbid people to use proprietary software at all,
but there are bad theoretical and practical consequences of that.
> > I can redistribute any GPLed software I want under the Big Beard Agreement,
> > where, to get the software from me, you have to solemnly certify that you
> > have a big beard.
> >
> > Once you have obtained a copy of the software, you have the right to
> > redistribute it freely.
>
> Where does Corel assert that users have this right? If they don't read
> those very words or something extremely close to them, they are going to
> assume that they DON'T have that right.
Corel's EULA actually mentions this:
Many of the Software Programs included in Corel LINUX are distributed
under the terms of the GNU General Public License (``GPL'') and other
similar license agreements which permit You to copy, modify and
redistribute the Software Programs. Please review the terms and
conditions of the license agreement that accompanies each of the
Software Programs included in Corel LINUX.
Corel's EULA doesn't mention _some_ details of the GPL, but it does allude to
the fact that users have the right to distribute some of the software, and
even encourages users to read the GPL.
Corel doesn't include an entire essay on free software licensing in its EULA,
but it does give a capsule summary of some of the permissions which are
granted and encourage users to read the licenses for themselves. I think
this is reasonable.
> > > * This is Corel Linux (not Corel GNU/Linux). GNU who?
> >
> > No comment. :-)
>
> This is important stuff. Most people don't realize that "Linux" is not an
> OS, and most of what they think of as "Linux" was created by the GNU
> project, not by Linus Torvalds.
I consider that debate much larger and separate from this one. You and
other people have accused them of doing something bad in their license
text. If they have done something bad in the _name of their operating
system_, it's a separate issue.
It _might_ be part of a larger pattern, but proving that is much harder.
> > > * We retain title to this software distribution, even though it's
> > > mostly not of our creation.
> >
> > That is a misrepresentation of what the EULA says.
>
> How so?
Because the GPL says "Corel [...] and others". Corel did not assert that
it had title to all of what it was shipping.
> > > * GPL? What GPL? I see no mention of the GPL in our license...
> >
> > That is also a misrepresentation of what the EULA says.
>
> The license, apparently, _DOES_ mention the GPL; this is good. However,
> does the EULA?
The EULA is the license; the "L" in "EULA" stands for "license".
> > - Register EULA.org and set up you.should.not.accept.the.Corel.EULA.org,
> > and send e-mail from an account there (acknowledging Corel's trademarks)
>
> I'm not going to acknowledge Corel's ANYTHING. Why should I?
If you name something after Corel or its products, you might infringe their
trademark and get in trouble if you don't make the status of that trademark
clear.
> > - Take all of the free software in Corel Linux and make your own distribution.
> > You could call it LEROC GNU/Linux, for "LEROC's, Eh, Reminiscent Of
> > Corel(R)", and license it under whatever terms you prefer.
>
> You don't get it... by not mentioning that people DO have the right to
> do all the things that the GPL permits with those portions of Corel Linux
> that ARE under the GPL, 99.9% of their WinIdiot users are going to
> assume that they CAN'T do those things, since 99.9% of them haven't
> heard of the GPL in the first place. Corel is neglecting to remind the
> users of their rights; while this is not illegal, it's deceptive and nasty
> and very much contrary to the spirit of the GPL.
The Corel EULA says:
Many of the Software Programs included in Corel LINUX are distributed
under the terms of the GNU General Public License (``GPL'') and other
similar license agreements which permit You to copy, modify and
redistribute the Software Programs. [...]
If you follow the link which the EULA encourages you to follow for more
information about license terms, you see a page provided by Corel with
information such as
These types of licenses are often referred to as "Open Source"
licenses. For more information on Open Source licenses, visit
www.opensource.org. [...]
Please review the on-line documentation that accompanies each of the
Software Programs included in Corel LINUX for the terms and conditions
that apply to your use of each Software Program. For your convenience,
set out below are links to some of the more common license agreements
under which Software Programs included in Corel LINUX are licensed.
Common Licenses
GNU General Public License ("GNU GPL") - The GNU GPL is an open source
software license created by the Free Software Foundation. [...]
In that text, "GNU General Public License" is a link to the complete text
of the GPL.
> > But if you want to call their behavior _illegal_, you need to show why it
> > is illegal.
>
> Maybe it -isn't- illegal. In any case, it's immoral.
I'm not sure that Corel had any intent to deny people their rights under the
GPL or even to make them unaware of their rights under the GPL.
Corel's license may be ambiguous or confusing in explaining the nature of the
rights that the GPL grants. It might help if the license were clarified.
--
Seth David Schoen <schoen@loyalty.org> | And do not say, I will study when I
Temp. http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/ | have leisure; for perhaps you will
down: http://www.loyalty.org/ (CAF) | not have leisure. -- Pirke Avot 2:5
Reply to: