Squeak License OSD-compliance

[Cees de Groot]

Matthew C. Weigel <weigel at libcom.com> said:
>Section 2: There is a thorny issue about fonts. 

It's not, for two reasons: the fonts are bitmap fonts, and since the Squeak
License was written they have been shown not to be protectable under copyright
laws in various court cases - so we could just strike the whole passage. For
good measure, though, we're working on replacing the Apple fonts.

(separating them is hardly an option, Squeak is distributed as a single image
file containing the base software including fonts and other necessary
artwork).

>Section 2: it is somewhat inaccurate to say that this license is an 
>X11/MIT flavored license when it requires that modifications to 
>existing methods or the VM be released under the license of Exhibit 
>A.

That's the only exception to an otherwise laissez-faire license (and I think a
good one, too).

>Section 6: I'm pretty sure that's a no-no, at least under OSD#5.
>
This is indeed one of the biggest questions. If it's a no-no, I fear we need
to go back and negotiate with Apple (we are already doing that in order to
have two irons in the fire - getting SqueakL OSD compliant *and* coercing
Apple to relicense it under their now-standard open source license, which I -
and I'm sure you all - would greatly prefer. However, I don't hold my breath
because Apple has no interest at all in Squeak).

-- 
Cees de Groot               http://www.cdegroot.com     <cg at cdegroot.com>
GnuPG 1024D/E0989E8B 0016 F679 F38D 5946 4ECD  1986 F303 937F E098 9E8B
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3