IMAPD license problem
IMAPD is included in main because it has a license which people
usually interpret as giving permission to distribute modified
versions.
But the University of Washington explicitly says they don't believe it
means this. In effect, we cannot consider IMAPD as free software
unless we are willing to dare them to sue us.
I've included a recent message in which they clearly state they
believe that you have to *ask* for permission to distribute a modified
version.
Now, it could be that they will give us permission to release
a modified version and to permit others to modify our version.
If so, then our version would be free even if theirs isn't,
and that would solve the problem. It could make sense to ask
(but it would be better not to mention my name, because the FSF
and the UW almost had a lawsuit about this very issue for PINE).
So I hope that Debian will move IMAPD out of main, if Debian cannot
get permission to release a free version.
How do other free IMAP servers compare with IMAPD? Would someone like
to write down a list of what is needed to improve some other server so
that it would make IMAPD uninteresting? We could then try to find
someone to do the work.
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 10:44:12 -0700 (Pacific Daylight
Time)
From: Lori Stevens <lrs@cac.washington.edu>
Reply-To: Lori Stevens <lrs@cac.washington.edu>
Subject: UW IMAPD
To: wspraul@q-ag.de
Wolfgang
Thanks for your inquiry.
UW\\\'s intent has always been to allow others to modify
the UW IMAPD for their own needs, or to redistribute the
original version, without having to ask for permission.
We do expect and appreciate folks to ask before
re-distributing derivative works, but obtaining
permission is not onerous; indeed, by this message you
have our permission to do so.
We confirm that we have given you permission to
distribute a modified version of IMAPD on the condition
that you assume all risks when you do so and agree to
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the University of
Washington from any and all claims or damages that might
arise through your activity related to a modified IMAPD.
In order to reduce confusion and facilitate debugging,
we request that locally modified versions, including
those which are distributed, either be denoted by
appending a letter to the current version number or that
you in some way show that it is a derivative work in the
version number.
regards, Lori Stevens
-----
Reply to: