Section 2 source distribution terms (was Re: GPL vs APSL (was: YAPL is bad))
Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
rod at cyberspaces.org
Fri Sep 28 11:30:23 UTC 2001
It's my understanding that OSI is trying to come up with a plan to review
the OSD. I may be presenting a proposal to larry soon to help them in that
effort. Even so, I think the lawyers could benefit from the input of the
developers. I would not abandon the project.
>From: "Russell Nelson" <nelson at crynwr.com>
>To: "license-discuss at opensource.org"
<license-discuss at opensource.org>
>Subj: Re: Section 2 source distribution terms (was Re: GPL vs APSL
(was: YAPL is bad))
>Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 12:55 AM
>Karsten M. Self writes:
> > Proposed language:
> > 2. Source Code
> > The license most provide for distribution in source code as well
> > compiled form. Where some form of a product is not distributed
> > source code, there must be a well publicized means of obtaining
> > source code for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost --
> > preferably, downloading via the Internet without charge or access
> > restrictions. The source code so offered must be in the
> > form in which a programmer would modify the program.
> > obfuscated source code does not qualify. Intermediate forms such
> > the output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed. For
> > licenses in which distribution without source is allowed, an OSD
> > Qualifying Distribution shall be defined as an offering of the
> > software, under qualifying license terms, with source or an offer
> > source as described in this paragraph.
>Good. Close. Better than my previous attempt. What do you think
> 2. Source Code
> The license applies to source code. A compiled executable is
> considered a derived work. Such an executable is only open source
> if its source code is also open source. When a compiled
> executable is not distributed with source code, there must be a
> well publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more
> than a reasonable reproduction cost -- preferably, downloading via
> the Internet without charge or access restrictions. The source
> code so offered must be in the preferred form in which a
> programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated
> source code does not qualify. Intermediate forms such as the
> output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed.
>Of course, a big problem with the OSD is that it talks about legal
>requirements, and yet was not touched by a lawyer before being cast
>into stone. Any kind of extensive rewrite probably ought to be done
>by people with actual experience with the law, as opposed to
>dilettantes like you and I.
>-russ nelson <sig at russnelson.com> http://russnelson.com
>Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | It's a crime, not an
>521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | of war. For my take,
>Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
>license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
More information about the License-discuss