On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 01:21:52PM +0800, Leon Brooks wrote:
> To hear the press squeak, you would think that MNF was made entirely of OSS 
> that had been closed (not legally possible for 75% of what's on there, and 
> Gael knows that).
> 
> AFACIT...
> 
>  * if you want to use the `$0' version, unsupported, go for it
> 
>  * if you want support, you pay per server, which is fair
> 
>  * it is not clear what parts of the `$0' version are covered by the
>    commercial clauses; since all of the pieces except for a little
>    blue Mandrake glue are available elsewhere, and usually under the
>    GPL, it seems 100% legal to use all but the restricted `blue glue'
>    software under the previous conditions of use.
> 
> Who do I contact to get a clarifying press release out of Mandrake?

There is no restricted blue glue... Everything is licensed under the
GPL.  If you buy the commercial license the "blue glue" is licensed
under the commercial license.

At any rate Leon you are not alone in these thoughts.  I certainly had
some questions that came to my mind when I started reading about MNF.
The questions I have are:

a) Where the heck is the exact copy of the commercial license text?  You
provide us this page: 
http://www.mandrakesoft.com/products/mnf/license
But why is it that I have to buy the product to read your license?
Obviously the page doesn't completely detail our rights and obligations
under this other license or you wouldn't direct us to read it on the
page.

b) Why is Mandrake making it seem as though only paying customers will
have access to security updates?  (6 months of free security updates :
http://www.mandrakesoft.com/products/mnf/pricing )  Is Mandrake now
engaging in pay for security updates?  Or is this wording a mistake?  As
things stand now it sure looks like the "security blackmail" that vdanen
was complaining about ISC doing recently:
http://www.freezer-burn.org/article.php?story=20021114100304648

c) Your statement that buying the commercial version would free you from
GPL restrictions seems to be very misleading.  It can only release you
from such restrictions for software that you wrote.  But as Leon has
correctly pointed out the vast majority of that software isn't written
by you.  (See the statement in the paragraph that follows "Finally, what
is the recommendation?" section on this page:
http://www.mandrakesoft.com/products/mnf/license)

I'm sure you understand that, but the wording on your site sure doesn't
convey that very well.  I think you're doing the community a disservice
by not making it really clear.

d) Why aren't you just selling just support for the product?  You say
that I'd get additional rights to modify the product.  But what if I
have no intention of wanting those rights?  $1,990 is a rather steep
price to pay for simply 30 days installation support and "6 months free
security updates," which at least at this point in time so far are free
anyway.

e) On the license page which I've already provided the URL to several
times above... you say that if I decide to as a VAR sell MNF to my
clients that I must conform "to all of MandrakeSoft's intellectual
rights and trademark protections listed in the product (this includes
removing MandrakeSoft logos & trademarks from the product)."  This seems
to be a catch 22.

The GPL requires you to display an appropriate copyright, while it is
not clear in this, I would take that to mean that I must display a
Mandrake copyright notice on the software Mandrake wrote.  Additionally
it requires that if it is an interactive program that I display an
appropriate copyright notice if the program displays that.  Since
Mandrakesoft would obviously lay trademark rights to it's own name, how
can I possibly comply?

Further does this mean that Mandrake is going to start enforcing their
trademark rights on the main distro?  E.G. if I sell a computer to
someone and install Mandrake Linux along with some modified packages
(e.g. packages modified to say have necessary drivers) must I not call
it Mandrake Linux and remove your trademarks from it (note this is
hypothetical)?

I really think Mandrake has some clarification to do here.  Certainly
they should make their website for MNF much more clear about the
licensing restrictions.  

Before you respond.  Remember you are not just responding to a
contributor, but also a customer and shareholder in your company.

-- 
Ben Reser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://ben.reser.org

"If you're not making any mistakes, you're flat out not trying hard
enough." - Jim Nichols

Reply via email to