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

Re: Squeak in Debian?

Roland Stigge wrote:
> today I read that Alan Kay will receive this years's Turing Award[1] and
> checked out his "Open Source" project Squeak[2]. I also realized that
> there is an open RFP for it[3]. The package is supposed to be free, but
> when I checked the license[4] and the package files, I encountered the
> following issues which should be resolved before squeak hits the
> archive:

I'm trying to figure out if Squeak can be packaged at all or not.  It
seems clear that the license is not compatible with the DFSG and hence
a place in main is out of question.

For this I've tried to extract helpful bits from the this thread.

| Roland Stigge <a
| href="http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal-0404/msg00159.html";>\
| identified</a> the following problems in the <a
| href="http://www.squeak.org/download/license.html";>license</a> of
| <a href="http://www.squeak.org/";>Squeak</a>:
| (1) Clause 2 states: 'You may modify and create derivative works of the
| Apple Software ("Modified Software"), however, you may not modify or
| create derivative works of the fonts provided by Apple ("Fonts").'
| This seems to violate DFSG.3 ("Derived Works").
| (2) Clause 2 also states: "You may distribute and sublicense the Fonts
| only as a part of and for use with Modified Software, and not as a part
| of or for use with Modified Software that is distributed or sublicensed
| for a fee or for other valuable consideration."
| This seems to violate DFSG.1 ("Free Redistribution").

Markus Gaelli told me in private that the fonts were replaced by free
fonts.  Let's assume for the moment this is the case.  

It it is indeed the case, the license needs to be expanded to contain
a note about the free fonts and their license, and a note about the
absense of non-free fonts.

| (3) Clause 6 states: "You may not use or otherwise export or reexport
| the Apple Software except as authorized by United States law and the
| laws of the jurisdiction in which the Apple Software was obtained. In
| particular, but without limitation, the Apple Software may not be
| exported or reexported (i) into (or to a national or resident of) any
| U.S. embargoed country [...]"
| Which seems to violate DFSG.5 ("No Discrimination Against Persons or
| Groups") since it explicitly excludes people in countries like Cuba (?)
| from receiving copies of this package. I don't think we can maintain a
| list of countries which the USA enforce an embargo on at a time.
| (4) The distributed files squeak.changes and squeak.image, both around
| 10MB, are shipped in binary form. I wonder if there should be source
| code to create them initially. (See DFSG.2, "Source Code")
| With regards to squeak.changes Brian Thomas Sniffen <a
| href="http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal-0404/msg00162.html";>\
| explained</a>:
| Those files are source, they're just not saved as ascii text.  They
| are SmallTalk source, saved in the preferred format for modification:
| the native format of the SmallTalk class browser.
| With regards to US export restrictions Lex Spoon <a
| href="http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal-0404/msg00296.html";>\
| asserted</a>:
| It should be fine in non-free, however, so long as it would not cause
| our non-free infrastructure to break the license and so long as it does
| not add unacceptible liability to Debian.  Since much of our non-free
| infrastructure is in the US, I would think we must follow US export law
| anyway, even on non-free servers that are not in the US.

Hence, both of the above issues may be resolved as well.

| Nathanael Nerode <a
| href="http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal-0404/msg00214.html";>\
| identified</a> the following problems in the license of Squeak:
| There are other problems with clause 2.
| "You may distribute and sublicense such Modified Software only under the
| terms of a valid, binding license that makes no representations or
| warranties on behalf of Apple, and is no less protective of Apple and
| Apple's rights than this License."
| What the heck does that even *mean*?  Licenses aren't "binding"; they're
| thinking of contracts.  In fact, the whole license thinks it's a contract
| (which is bad from the start).  "Protective of Apple and Apple's rights" is
| incredible vague, meaning that only this exact license is a safe license
| for derivative works.

What's this?

 [ ] compatible with the DFSGg
 [ ] Renders the package non-free
 [ ] Renders the package non-distributable

| "If the Modified Software contains modifications, overwrites, replacements,
| deletions, additions, or ports to new platforms of: (1) the methods of
| existing class objects or their existing relationships, or (2) any part of
| the virtual machine, then for so long as the Modified Software is
| distributed or sublicensed to others, such modified, overwritten, replaced,
| deleted, added and ported portions of the Modified Software must be made
| publicly available, preferably by means of download from a website, at no
| charge under the terms set forth in Exhibit A below."
| This is a forced-distribution clause.  It requires that if the Modified
| Software is given to *anyone*, it must be made "publicly available" (to
| lots of *other* people) at no charge.  This fails the dissident test and
| the desert island test.  It's also a practical inconvenience; I can't share
| a modified version with my spouse without publishing it.

What's this?

 [ ] compatible with the DFSGg
 [ ] Renders the package non-free
 [ ] Renders the package non-distributable

| And furthermore, the worst line of all:
| "This License allows you to copy, install and use the Apple Software on an
| unlimited number of computers under your direct control."
| Purports to restrict use.  Doesn't allow use on computers not "under your
| direct control", which is a substantial restriction; it probably prohibits
| it from being installed by a Debian admin onto a Debian machine which is
| hosted elsewhere.  :-P

What's this?

 [ ] compatible with the DFSGg
 [ ] Renders the package non-free
 [ ] Renders the package non-distributable

| This probably means that it's not freely redistributable at all; there's no
| other permission to copy or redistribute given in the "license".

But is it distributable for Debian?



A mathematician is a machine for converting coffee into theorems.   Paul Erdös

Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.

Reply to: