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

Re: [argouml-dev] javahelp in debian

On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 02:22:34PM +0200, Grzegorz Prokopski wrote:
> W li?cie z pi?, 12-07-2002, godz. 11:50, Markus Klink pisze: 
> > but what is so problematic about the license?
> <disclaimer>
> I am not a lawyer, only a developer. I am not authoritative about
> what's really wrong. However I'll express my feelings here, below.
> About licenses it is normal to discuss it on debian-legal mailing
> list, so I am Cc:ing there.
> I am sure that people from d-legal will corect my mistakes
> </disclaimer>
> So I took another look at the license Sun uses for JavaHelp at
> http://java.sun.com/products/javahelp/download_binary.html#download
> [click the upper "continue" to see the license]
> and here's what I don't like in it mostly.
> "2. License to Distribute Redistributables. (...)
> (ii) you do not distribute additional software intended to supersede any
> component(s) of the Redistributables. (...)
>  (v) you agree to defend and indemnify Sun and its licensors from and
> against any damages, costs, liabilities, settlement amounts and/or
> expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred in connection with any
> claim, lawsuit or action by any third party that arises or results from
> the use or distribution of any and all Programs and/or Software."
> (ii) not sure here, but one could understand it that if Debian
> distributes JavaHelp - it is not allowed to distribute any free
> replacement of it. Not sure how it fits in the idea that "contrib and
> non-free are not parts of Debian".
> (v) seems to mean, that Debian, SPI or packager(? no idea which one)
> would have to be financially responsible for any lawsuits or any other
> actions against Sun because of the software.
> Somebody please correct me, but I don't think that this software
> would fit even in non-free.

We can probably get around (ii) I think.  Sun were willing at some point to
grant an exception to it for Debian I believe.  This would make it non-free,
but we could distribute it.  I imagine they would still extend that to us.
One of the blackdown.org people might know more about this than I.  It has
been a while.

The real killer is (v).  What it boils down to is that Debian, as
redistributor, must indemnify Sun against any third party who gets the
package from us deciding to sue Sun.  This doesn't just make it non-free, it
makes it non-distributable.  Debian should not IMO agree to indemnify Sun in
this way.


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: