On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 02:47:22PM +0800, Andy Sy wrote:
> >I'm sorry, but you aren't listening. If something is the subject of
> >commerce, it is by definition commercial.
>
> And that's where the problem lies. You insist on using a moot
> definition when there is a slightly different one that is much
> more practically applicable to the situation at hand. In this case,
> 'commercial license' means a license whose provisions you have *no
> choice* but to pay for in order to take advantage of, something that
> the GPL expressly forbids (you can ask people to pay for your [modified]
> sources, but you can't _force_ them to - the moment you redistribute
> you give it out under terms that essentially render it free). Thus
> 'commercial license' is a valid and practical term which MySQL AB
> has seen fit to apply.
Seems there's a language conflict here on what is deemed "commercial".
Here's a definition of what constitutes a commercial item (accdg to
NASA John H. Glenn Research Center):
1. Any item, other than real property, that is of a type customarily
used for nongovernmental purposes and that-
1. Has been sold, leased, or licensed to the general public; or
2. Has been offered for sale, lease, or license to the general
public;
2. Any item that evolved from an item described in paragraph (1) of
this definition through advances in technology or performance and that
is not yet available in the commercial marketplace, but will be
available in the commercial marketplace in time to satisfy the delivery
requirements under a Government solicitation;
3. Any item that would satisfy a criterion expressed in paragraphs
(1) or (2) of this definition, but for-
1. Modifications of a type customarily available in the
commercial marketplace; or
2. Minor modifications of a type not customarily available in
the commercial marketplace made to meet Federal Government requirements.
Minor modifications means modifications that do not significantly alter
the nongovernmental function or essential physical characteristics of an
item or component, or change the purpose of a process. Factors to be
considered in determining whether a modification is minor include the
value and size of the modification and the comparative value and size of
the final product. Dollar values and percentages may be used as
guideposts, but are not conclusive evidence that a modification is
minor;
4. Any combination of items meeting the requirements of paragraphs
(1), (2), (3), or (5) of this definition that are of a type customarily
combined and sold in combination to the general public;
5. Installation services, maintenance services, repair services,
training services, and other services if such services are procured for
support of an item referred to in paragraphs (1), (2), (3), or (4) of
this definition, and if the source of such services-
1. Offers such services to the general public and the Federal
Government contemporaneously and under similar terms and conditions; and
2. Offers to use the same work force for providing the Federal
Government with such services as the source uses for providing such
services to the general public;
6. Services of a type offered and sold competitively in substantial
quantities in the commercial marketplace based on established catalog or
market prices for specific tasks performed under standard commercial
terms and conditions. This does not include services that are sold based
on hourly rates without an established catalog or market price for a
specific service performed;
7. Any item, combination of items, or service referred to in
paragraphs (1) through (6) of this definition, notwithstanding the fact
that the item, combination of items, or service is transferred between
or among separate divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliates of a
contractor; or
8. A nondevelopmental item, if the procuring agency determines the
item was developed exclusively at private expense and sold in
substantial quantities, on a competitive basis, to multiple State and
local governments.
> I'm not forcing you to accept this definition, but I'm sure most other
> people, including me, have no problem with it. Now it is my turn
> to ask you not to try to misapprehend them and me.
The same concept of what is commercial is also practiced in our laws.
A license just spells out what can be lawfully done, in which case
the GPL states that it would be illegal to inhibit disclosure of
modifications made to GPL-licensed code in the event that a derivative
of the GPL-licensed code gets distributed, among other provisions.
In our own laws, a license can be considered as a a contract (Civil Code
article 1305) or a quasi-contract (Civil Code articles 2164-2175).
In the case of the GPL, the law considers the parties to have executed a
contract (as a quasi-contract, as a deliberate formal agreement is
usually not necessary, though such consent has been supplied by fiction
of law).
However, it cannot be denied that some institutions find the GPL too
restrictive for their own commercial practices (say they want to
incorporate code copyrighted by another and distribute a derivative of
such without disclosing their modifications), and as such, some
entities (who hold copyright over their GPL-licensed code, like MySQL AB)
to offer alternative licensing schemes to make it more "palatable" to
those who find the GPL inappropriate for their practices. These entities
then label their alternative licensing schemes as "commercial licenses"->
meaning it's just a branding (though quite an inaccurate one).
--
Paolo Alexis Falcone
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fully Searchable Archives With Friendly Web Interface at http://marc.free.net.ph
To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
