[discuss] License Approval Request: Macromedia Open Source License

[Nathan Kelley]

To OSI License Discussion <license-discuss at opensource.org> subscribers,

> From: Tom Harwood <tharwood at macromedia.com>,

> Macromedia, Inc., would like to obtain OSI certification for its Open 
> Source License.  The Macromedia Open Source License is based on the IBM 
> Public License, with the following changes per our Legal department:
>
> (1) changed IBM to Macromedia,
> (2) clarify that if Macromedia includes its own open source in its 
> products, Macromedia does not have to state in its documentation where 
> the source code version of the open source material is made available,
> (3) clarify that Macromedia does not have to include its own copyright 
> notice in the event Macromedia decides to incorporate its own open 
> source materials in its commercial products,
> (4) require the inclusion of the copyright notice in documentation as 
> well as the software,
> (5) changed the choice of law from New York to California.
>
> A specimen copy is available on our website: 
> http://www.macromedia.com/v1/handlers/index.cfm?ID=23075

I have read the Macromedia Open Source License Agreement v1.0. I believe 
that it does not meet the requirements for OSI certification, as it 
conflicts with the Open Source Definition. Specifically:

Item 3.IV in the license states that: "...other than in the event that 
such Contributor is Macromedia, (A) states that source code for the 
Program is available from such Contributor, and (B) informs licensees 
how to obtain it in a reasonable manner on or through a medium 
customarily used for software exchange."

This conflicts with Open Source Definition, item 2, which states: 
"...Where some form of a product 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..."

The license terms absolve Macromedia from needing to fulfill this 
requirement in the event that Macromedia does not include the source 
code for a product with the product itself. If this exclusion were 
removed, I believe this would allow the license to qualify for OSI 
certification.

A notice advising the availability of source code does not have to be 
in-your-face; it just can't be buried away. Placing it as a line stating 
"Source code is available for this software upon request. See our site:" 
with a URL into an about box or into a README file would, I believe, be 
acceptable.

Could a subscriber on the list please confirm these points for me?

Cheers, Nathan.
________________________________________________
Nathan "Phyax" Kelley

    email | phyax at runbox.com, phyax at mac.com
      icq | 4618849
    yahoo | phyax
________________________________________________

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