ask for APSL? for real this time?
Andrew C. Greenberg
werdna at mucow.com
Tue Jan 13 13:18:54 UTC 2004
On Jan 13, 2004, at 1:50 AM, Doug Way wrote:
> 3. Try some trickery with sublicensing to get around the Squeak-L
> clauses which are problematic for OSI/Debian/etc. Andrew, do you have
> any thoughts on whether this is possible? Squeak-L says a sublicense
> must be "no less protective of Apple and Apple's rights than this
> License". If we crafted a sublicense SqueakSub-L which was acceptable
> to OSI and Debian, and got a written agreement from Apple (with the
> help of some luminaries if need be) that it was indeed an acceptable
> sublicense of Squeak-L, would that work? Or is investigating
> sublicensing pointless?
It would be a decent beginning, and would overcome the key hurdle.
Best practice would be to get signoff from all subsequent contributors,
including Disney, but we must work with the art of the possible., and
the language of Squeak-L (apparently hardwired to Apple) gives us an
opportunity to exploit Disney's lack of diligence (they COULD have, but
did not, change the license to be protective of both Disney and Apple).
The question is what new license would we adopt? Can we reach a
consensus with which all or everybody should agree?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 2361 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20040113/f950a2ae/smime.bin
More information about the Squeak-dev