[Cryptography Team] Re: Cryptography Team and Freedom Software Law Center Meeting Update

[Serge Stinckwich]

Le 4 nov. 05 à 02:17, Ron Teitelbaum a écrit :

> Hello All,
>
> I met with Dan Ravicher, he is the Legal Director at the Software  
> Freedom
> Law Center.  We had a very nice conversation about the Cryptography  
> Team's
> issues.  We also covered general squeak licensing issues because of  
> our
> talks with Cincom about porting their cryptography code to squeak.   
> There
> are two things that need to happen before they will agree to  
> represent us,
> none of which I believe will be a problem.
>
> First we need to provide a legal entity and ensure we have  
> permission to
> engage software freedom org to represent the community.  I have  
> worked with
> Cees and have been introduced by way of a very nice email to the  
> board at
> ESUG.  I will keep you informed on that progress.
>
> Second we need to sign an engagement agreement to set up the  
> Attorney Client
> Relationship.  The agreement basically says they agree to represent  
> us for
> no charge.
>
> We have discussed registration issues for US Export of  
> cryptography.  They
> assure me that they can handle this for us and have agreed to start  
> the
> process pending our formal agreement.
>
> I also discussed the potential of porting the Cincom code and they  
> agreed to
> help work out the issues if Cincom agrees with our proposal.  I  
> hope that
> these conversations will be fruitful since it would be very good  
> for all.
>
> We also discussed the general squeak licensing issues.  Dan wanted  
> to know
> more information about what the issues were in general and I have  
> passed
> along to him a link to the license discussion page.  The summary  
> that I gave
> him was that we are covered under SqueakL but would prefer to move the
> entire squeak project to MIT and that there have been a number of  
> objections
> to using LGPL.  Cees has already pointed out once that those  
> objections
> might be baseless but Marcus points out that LGPL may be viral and the
> license doesn't play well outside of C libraries.  So I believe it  
> would be
> a good thing to at least shore up our options so a decision can be  
> made and
> a path to follow is illuminated.
>
> I also mentioned our other lawyer volunteer Polly Dinkle, and Dan  
> said he
> would be very pleased to discuss this project with her.  I'm sure an
> introduction between the two would be very good.  Matt I'll leave  
> it to you.
> You can introduce the subject to Polly, do the introduction between  
> Dan and
> Polly yourself, or I would still be very happy to have the meeting  
> between
> the three of us first before the introduction.
>
> I am happy to report the meeting went well and that it is my  
> feeling that
> very good things will come from our new relationship with Freedom  
> Software.
>

Thanks you Ron, for the report and all the great work, you are doing  
for the Squeak community !


--                                                         oooo
Dr. Serge Stinckwich                                     OOOOOOOO
Université de Caen>CNRS UMR 6072>GREYC>MAD               OOESUGOO
http://purl.org/net/SergeStinckwich                       oooooo
Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]   \  /
                                                             ##