OVPL & "Otherwise Make Available" (was RE: Change ot topic,backto OVPL)

[Alex Bligh]

Larry / Chris,

--On 26 August 2005 11:46 +0200 Chris Zumbrunn <chris at czv.com> wrote:

>> --On 26 August 2005 09:59 +0200 Chris Zumbrunn <chris at czv.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If I relay my mail through an OVPL licensed SMTP server, does that
>>> mean
>>> the software was "Otherwise Made Available" to me?
>>
>> Yes, I think so. Ditto "externally deployed" as far as the OSL is
>> concerned
>> in my opinion. The licensor has let a third party (you) use the
>> software.
>>
>> This triggers the obligation to provide source under both licenses.
>
> If I relay my mail through an OVPL licensed SMTP server, does that mean
> the software was "Otherwise Made Available" to YOU?

and Larry Rosen wrote:
>> Yes, I think so. Ditto "externally deployed" as far as the
>> OSL is concerned in my opinion. The licensor has let a third
>> party (you) use the software.
>>
>> This triggers the obligation to provide source under both licenses.
>
> Nope. External deployment occurs in the OSL when the software is "used by
> anyone other than You," not when it merely delivers email to those
> people.

OK, well this turns on what is meant by "use", which I guess depends
on the circumstances.

If you think along the lines of a web-mail solution licensed under the
OSL/OVPL (the OSL definition of external deployment being very close to the
OVPL "Otherwise made Available). Let us assume the source has been
modified, and deployed by party X. He then lets third-party Y use the
web-mail service. This is I think a classic case of External Deployment
under the OSL, and would similarly constitute "making otherwise available".

What if the webmail service had its front end removed (or used a
differently licensed front-end), and user Y simply communicated with the
OSL/OVPL licensed backend, and rather than using HTTP to send/receive
messages, used POP3/IMAP/SMTP-SUMBIT. My response to Chris was based on
the view "how can protocol make any difference"?

I would have thought both constitute "use".

If Chris was merely talking about an intermediate relay along the way, I
think the answer would be different, in that Y is not 'using' them (in the
sense envisaged by the OSL). Perhaps the word unqualified word "use" is
both the OSL 2.0 and the proposed mod I put up is not ideal.

Alex