[License-discuss] Pars pro toto: a fundamental(?) lack in (MIT licensed) (jquery) java-script packages?
zak at fsf.org
Mon May 19 15:02:22 UTC 2014
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 02/03/2014 02:57 PM, John Sullivan wrote:
> -------- Original Message -------- From: "Reincke, Karsten"
> <k.reincke at telekom.de> Sent: February 3, 2014 10:58:53 AM EST To:
> "license-discuss at opensource.org" <license-discuss at opensource.org>
> Cc: John Sullivan <johns at fsf.org> Subject: Re: [License-discuss]
> Pars pro toto: a fundamental(?) lack in (MIT licensed) (jquery)
> java-script packages?
> Many thanks for your comments. We discussed your proposals during
> the last weeks very thoroughly, even it seems to be only a 'small'
> We totally agree with John Sullivan: the main purpose of
> distributing the license text itself (as it is required by nearly
> all open source licenses) is not to use the software compliantly,
> but to let the user know that he has some rights and certain
> freedoms. Nevertheless, we have to take the licenses seriously: If
> the licenses require that "permission notice shall be included in
> all copies or substantial portions of the Software" (MIT) and if
> that can't be implemented because of technical reasons (loss of
> performance), there is a gap.
> To solve this gap in the spirit of the open source idea, we are
> modifying our sites by following the proposal of the FSF: our sites
> (eg. OSLiC [http://dtag-dbu.github.io/oslic/], OSCAd
> [http://dtag-dbu.github.io/oscad/], or DTAG github user
> [http://dtag-dbu.github.io/]) shall offer a specific page listing
> all FLOSS components used by the sites. And the footer of each page
> of the site shall link the phrase "FLOSS components" to that page.
> And we try to communicate this solution into our complete company.
> Please feel free to add further comments and proposals if you see a
> better way to fulfill our obligations.
> Best regards Karsten Reincke
> --- Deutsche Telekom AG / Products & Innovation Karsten Reincke,
> PMP®, Senior Expert Open Source Review Board - T&P/A&S/TM [display
> complete signatur:
> http://opensource.telekom.net/kreincke/kr-dtag-sign-de.txt ]
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: John Sullivan
> [mailto:johns at fsf.org] Gesendet: Freitag, 3. Januar 2014 00:24 An:
> Reincke, Karsten Cc: license-discuss at opensource.org Betreff: Re:
> [License-discuss] Pars pro toto: a fundamental(?) lack in (MIT
> licensed) (jquery) java-script packages?
> "Reincke, Karsten" <k.reincke at telekom.de> writes:
>> Therefore, we want to ask:
>> Are we right? Do we really have to add the MIT license to an MIT
>> licensed package which does not contain this license? Or is
>> there any way to distribute the library to our 3rd. parties in
>> exact that form we received from jquery?
> that we hope people will adopt -- they are both machine and human
> readable -- at
> is probably most suitable for cases like jquery.
> License notices are important for the people receiving the software
> -- so that users who get the software know they have certain
> freedoms. It may help to think about it in these terms as well as
> just satisfying copyright holder requirements/expectations.
> -- John Sullivan | Executive Director, Free Software Foundation GPG
> Key: 61A0963B | http://status.fsf.org/johns |
> Do you use free software? Donate to join the FSF and support
> freedom at <http://www.fsf.org/register_form?referrer=8096>.
> _______________________________________________ License-discuss
> mailing list License-discuss at opensource.org
I'm Zak Rogoff, a campaigns manager that works with John Sullivan at
the Free Software Foundation.
I wanted to congratulate you again on taking steps to display full
license information on OSLiC's and OSCAd's websites, and check in with
you about the status of the project.
We'd be glad to answer questions or provide help (we have an email
list of experts specifically for this purpose), and, if you are
interested, make a supportive announcement when the project is complete.
Free Software Foundation
GPG ID: B5090AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the License-discuss