Hi Cees,
Now I would like to know if this is possible that we ask andrew and the lawyer that ron contact for the cryptographic packages to write down their analysis and that we publish it on the squeak web site.
I think that is a good idea. Not that any surprises will pop up - the issues with the Squeak License have been hashed out many times, including a couple of times in discussions with Andrew Greenberg, who *is* a lawyer ;)
yes I know. Now it would be nice if we could have a letter or report from him that we could put on the web. Because I do not want to give them an email or a thread :).
However - these are US lawyers. You don't mention what country this company lives in, but their analysis may or may not apply to local laws.
Sure but already having the analysis of a US lawyer would be something.
So, if they are really serious, due dilligence would demand:
- a translation of the license into the local language by a licensed
legal translator;
- an evaluation of the result by a local IP lawyer.
This is what we will do via the french organization too.
But that one should do for any license.
BTW - if you think it's a good idea, you can pass them my contact details for any immediate questions. I think between the SqF board members, I've been doing the most legal work including more hours on the Squeak license than I care to count ;-).
Thanks. Their problem is really that they would like to see a statement on the potential risk and interpretation of the license by a lawyer. I think that it makes sense. The boss is not a law person nor a developer and he want to show to the state people funding his activities that he is not fooling them.
Regards,
Cees