APSL and Microsoft Broad Source License
ChristianHGross at yahoo.ca
Sat Feb 9 23:32:52 UTC 2002
At 15:29 09/02/2002 -0800, David Johnson wrote:
>On Saturday 09 February 2002 02:48 pm, Christian Gross wrote:
> > 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?
>It doesn't allow commercial usage. That's why you need to continue reading
>the license. The very next section allows it:
>"2.2 You may use, reproduce, display, perform, modify and Deploy Covered
>Code, provided that in each instance..."
>'Deploy' is defined in 1.4 as anything other than internal research and
>development or personal use. Thus 2.2 covers commercial use.
I saw that too and I thought hey no problem. But then 2.2.a explicitly states:
(a) You must satisfy all the conditions of Section 2.1 with respect to the
Source Code of the Covered Code;
Which would say, sure you can deploy however you want and use how you want,
so long as you use the sources as defined in section 2.1, which is defined
to be non-commercial.
This is why I brought up the original point. Why say two things and could
they not be a "submarine" type of Open Source license. I am really
confused by this...
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
More information about the License-discuss