<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.gmail-m-4119877524246044265gmail-m4826398025326005214msolistparagraph, li.gmail-m-4119877524246044265gmail-m4826398025326005214msolistparagraph, div.gmail-m-4119877524246044265gmail-m4826398025326005214msolistparagraph
{mso-style-name:gmail-m_-4119877524246044265gmail-m4826398025326005214msolistparagraph;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Bruce Perens wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>> In most cases I suggest a particular architectural design for the software which avoids gray areas in the law like this one.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Please train me. What particular architectural design do you recommend? I want an architecture that always permits a programmer to implement her own software in accordance with a published API, under any FOSS or proprietary license she chooses, and thereby let her software become intimate with some other open source software. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>No FOSS license that prohibits that is truly open source!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Best, /Larry<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b>From:</b> Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com> <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, January 22, 2019 4:10 PM<br><b>To:</b> Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>; license-discuss@lists.opensource.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [License-discuss] Intimacy in open source (SSPL and AGPL)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Oh, I could have so much fun with a question like that. But getting to the one about <i>licenses:</i><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>People who write highly reciprocal licenses have, in general, reserved a territory for people who want to link proprietary software in the form of a different license: for FSF this is LGPL or GPL-with-exception. If you want to combine your proprietary software with software under the license they have reserved for an exclusively Free territory, do not expect them to cooperate.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>I have, and continue to, help companies and their licensed counsel determine what to do in particular cases. In most cases I suggest a particular architectural design for the software which avoids gray areas in the law like this one.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'> Thanks<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'> Bruce<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 3:54 PM Lawrence Rosen <<a href="mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com">lrosen@rosenlaw.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Nick Weinstock proposed:<br>> </span>A clear statement about API interaction sounds like it would go a long way to clarify this section.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Bruce Perens wrote:<br>> </span>Nobody will ever make such a statement, because it would make it easier for you to do things they don't want you to do.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Bruce, I'm trying to parse this. Is "doing things" good or bad, legal or illegal, ethical or unethical, what FSF wants or doesn't want, what Bruce Perens desires or hates?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>I freely implemented APIs from the day I first became a programmer. You should tell us all what you mean so I know if I was a saint or a sinner.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Bravo to Nick! /Larry</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'><b>From:</b> License-discuss <<a href="mailto:license-discuss-bounces@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">license-discuss-bounces@lists.opensource.org</a>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Bruce Perens<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, January 22, 2019 3:23 PM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:license-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">license-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [License-discuss] Intimacy in open source (SSPL and AGPL)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'>Nobody will ever make such a statement, because it would make it easier for you to do things they don't want you to do.<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'>On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 2:18 PM Nicholas Matthew Neft Weinstock <<a href="mailto:nweinsto@qti.qualcomm.com" target="_blank">nweinsto@qti.qualcomm.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'>A clear statement about API interaction sounds like it would go a long way to clarify this section.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'>Some additional considerations:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=gmail-m-4119877524246044265gmail-m4826398025326005214msolistparagraph style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span>What about internal vs external APIs, so internal APIs are “intimate” but external APIs aren’t, similar to the Kernel’s UAPI? <o:p></o:p></p><p class=gmail-m-4119877524246044265gmail-m4826398025326005214msolistparagraph style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span>Could a library require API callers be under (A)GPLv3? Or would it need to use something like the Kernel’s MODULE_LICENSE interface?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=gmail-m-4119877524246044265gmail-m4826398025326005214msolistparagraph style='margin-left:1.5in'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span>What is necessary for API extensions to be considered “documented user calls and data structures”? Is it sufficient for the maintainers to integrate source modifications even if the accompanying documentation isn’t updated? Is it sufficient for source modifications to be publicly submitted to the maintainers? What if either of those were maintainers of a distinct fork rather than the original project? Is it sufficient for me to publish my modified version on my personal GitHub page as a one-time fork?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>_______________________________________________<br>License-discuss mailing list<br><a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div></div></body></html>