Discuss: The Open-Source Milestone Application Framework So

[Akil Franklin]

on Fri, Apr 26, 2002, Forrest J. Cavalier III (mibsoft at mibsoftware.com)
wrote:

> > 8. Milestone Technology Group, LLC is granted the right to use the
> > name and logos of products derived from this software in
> > communications related to the Milestone Application Framework.
> 
> Yikes! That may not be against the OSD, but I think you 
> are going to frighten away anyone who considers this software.

I can definitely see your point. The goal of the clause is to ensure
that we are legally and ethically capable of sharing with the rest of
the open source community exactly who is using the MAF and with what
level of success. 

We attempted to limit the intrusiveness of this clause with the phrase
"in communications related to the Milestone Application Framework", but
alas it seems to have done little to lessen the impact.

Is there any less intrusive method of achieving our goal? How do others
tackle this issue?

-- Akil

-----Original Message-----
From: Karsten M. Self [mailto:karsten at ix.netcom.com] On Behalf Of
Karsten M. Self
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 4:56 AM
To: license-discuss at opensource.org
Subject: Re: Discuss: The Open-Source Milestone Application Framework So

on Fri, Apr 26, 2002, Forrest J. Cavalier III (mibsoft at mibsoftware.com)
wrote:

> > 8. Milestone Technology Group, LLC is granted the right to use the
> > name and logos of products derived from this software in
> > communications related to the Milestone Application Framework.
> 
> Yikes! That may not be against the OSD, but I think you 
> are going to frighten away anyone who considers this software.

At the very least, it strongly recommends monkeywrenching:

    http://www.hinkleymall.com/bymail.html

("Mature" audience alert probably isn't the term.  I'd call it middlin'
adolescent).


The OSD may not prohibit this directly, but might be interpreted as
denying this via:

    1.  Free Redistribution:  "...The license shall not require a
    royalty or other fee for such sale."  Could such a right to
    publicity (similar to those included, say, in a prize contest or
    giveaway, be considered a (nonmonetary) fee or payment of brand
    equity?

    5 & 6, the "no discrimination" (persons and groups, and fields or
    endeavors, respectively).  Are there persons, groups, fields, or
    endeavors to whom a denial of privacy might be considered
    discriminatory?  RMS has argued that this is an implicit right to
    FSF Free Software.  The OSD is silent on the issue, though debate
    has not been.

I agree that this is a strategically, if not legally, poor move.

Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself at ix.netcom.com>
http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
   Google *this*:  <a href="http://xenu.org/">Scientology</a>

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3