Licenses for goodies Re: [ANN] kats-0.1a - a smalltalk transaction service
edwinp13 at home.com
Thu Aug 2 19:42:37 UTC 2001
Gee!! Now how can I honestly propagate half the lawyers jokes you just
nullified with this kind of post? Now those jokes are no longer beyond a
shadow of a doubt.
More power to you!
From: squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org
[mailto:squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org]On Behalf Of Andrew
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 11:12 AM
To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Subject: Re: Licenses for goodies Re: [ANN] kats-0.1a - a smalltalk
As a lawyer practicing in this field, I note that if representing a
defendant in such a case, this is the argument I would make. If I were
representing a plaintiff, I'd make another argument, to the extent you
aren't protecting sufficiently my remarks, and then show the fact-finder
a copy of your program displaying the fonts. You would pointedly
explain how the display of "other fonts" was not from your code, and so
forth, but then you would have to make that argument.
Now, from a practical point of view, none of that matters. Assume you
are representing a corporate entity and asked whether they can use
Squeak for their ongoing development, including your goodie. ANY
question about the propriety and applicability of a license will lead to
a negative conclusion. At some point, the non Squeak-L licensing of
goodies is too remote to be worth reviewing, and will just get dinged as
soon as the issue is raised.
I strongly recommend against lawyering your own licenses -- particularly
in this scenario. I would keep the license as-is, until Squeak itself
modifies the overall license. Failure to do so will likely result in
having the derivative work marginalized and/or ignored. It will also
make it a legally difficult challenge for incorporation of the goodie in
the image or distribution of the goodie with Squeak, whether or not part
of the image.
On Thursday, August 2, 2001, at 12:30 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> The Squeak license specifically allows for other/derivative licenses so
> as they are no less protective of Apple's rights. More to the point,
> a goodie does not INCLUDE Squeak, but rather runs WITH Squeak, it
> should be
> sufficient to remove (or just IGNORE) the font issues in the GOODIE
> If you wish to be particularly paranoid, you can add a reference stating
> that the goodie is intended for use in the Squeak environment, which is
> turn covered by the Squeak license.
> --- Noel
More information about the Squeak-dev