As this is about software licensing issues, I want to state here: I'm not a lawyer and this e-mail does not contain any legal advice. Oh, and if you're easily annoyed by licensing issues then you might prefer not to read this thread.
In "FreeDOS 1.1 (again)", dos386 wrote: > Bret's USBDOS (free & OS, not GPL) I'm not sure whether Bret's license would be accepted by the OSI or FSF though. The part that I'm concerned about most would be this: > You can use the programs > without restriction, but you cannot directly or indirectly use the > executable programs, documentation, or source code to create or > distribute new programs that are not also freely available. You also > cannot distribute the programs, documentation, or source code and charge > (even indirectly) for their distribution. You can charge someone enough > to cover your actual, direct costs for distribution (disks, shipping > materials, postage, etc.), but cannot charge for "handling". This also > means that you cannot distribute the programs, documentation, or source > code directly from a web site that charges a "registration fee" in an > attempt to make a profit or to recover direct or indirect costs for > maintaining the web site. Specifically, "indirectly using the programs to create or distribute new programs that are not also freely available" sounds to me like the license's copyleft covers _using the programs to program or distribute other programs_. If that is the case, you should think twice about using, say, USBKEYB to develop programs, or USBDRIVE to store them on USB storage media. (Generally, this copyleft may or may not make this license incompatible with other copylefted licenses such as the GPL. GPL incompatibility of course would not be a criterion for exclusion.) Moreover, I have a hunch that the no-selling part, in this form, is not compatible with at least some OSI and FSF licenses, and might entirely cause the license not to be considered "free software" by the FSF and "open source" by the OSI. > If you distribute related or derivative programs, you must use > essentially the same license. Could be understood to apply to programs that only use, for example, the API provided by the USB HCI drivers. There might be no FSF or OSI issues with that, because GPL libraries extend their copyleft to API users and the GPL is allowed by both organisations. However, the wording "related" might be too broad. It could even apply to programs only interfacing with the USB programs via command line. > You must provide and distribute the > programs and documentation for free, and you must include the > documentation with the program. This is misleading: Would one have to include the documentation even if one extracted a small part of the code and distributed that as part of a small program? Moreover, would one have to provide the original documentation in all cases? (Of course, such a strict requirement should at most apply to the license text and copyright notices.) Yes Bret, I know you don't want people to search for loopholes (as is stated by the license text; it is "writing down the intent"). And I admit that some of my points might be just such minor loopholes that the intent is clear. But I'd prefer* the license to state some of its intents more clearly, and I want to know what FreeDOS's developers think about including programs with this license. [ * Personally (egoistically), I'd rather prefer the programs to be in the public domain, or the license to be one of the well-known free software licenses (MIT-style, 2/3-clause BSD, etc) that do not cause trouble, or even other (common) ones like the GPL. But of course there's reasons not to do that, too. ] What do you people think? (And who's responsible for such FreeDOS project/distribution decisions?) Regards, Christian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
