APSL and Microsoft Broad Source License

Christian Gross ChristianHGross at yahoo.ca
Sat Feb 9 22:48:18 UTC 2002

(Sorry my email cut me off by accident)

Please excuse my ignorance again...  But here is the paragraph from the APSL

2.1 You may use, reproduce, display, perform, modify and distribute 
Original Code, with or without Modifications, solely for Your internal 
research and development and/or Personal Use, provided that in each instance:

That sentence is indeed saying you can use the software, but only for 
Personal Use, internal research and development.  From my limited legalese 
it does not allow commercial use, since the term Personal Use was 
pre-defined in the section 1.8 to preclude commercial usage.

Could someone please explain how this sentence allows commercial usage?


Christian Gross

At 14:43 09/02/2002 -0800, David Johnson wrote:
>On Saturday 09 February 2002 01:26 pm, Christian Gross wrote:
> > Can someone please tell me what the difference is and why the APSL is
> > considered Open Source and why the Microsoft License is not?
>The APSL allows you to use the software for commercial use, provide you
>submit any modifications to Apple. Although the license makes a distinction
>between commercial and non-commercial use, in each instance the software is
>still free.
>David Johnson
>pgp public key on website

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

More information about the License-discuss mailing list