A post about SqueakL

Tom Hoffman tom.hoffman at gmail.com
Mon Sep 12 18:05:51 UTC 2005


Hi folks,

I hope I didn't mortally offend anyone in the Squeak community by
posting my blog entry on the subject of the Squeak License without
discussing matters directly with the community.  I was getting the
feeling that if I tried to discuss it on every relevant mailing list
before I even said anything that I'd run out of steam before I got
started.

Plus, the Squeak community, based on the various sources I've found
online, seems pretty ambivalent in general on the subject.  As someone
who manages a philanthropically funded project myself (SchoolTool,
funded by the Shuttleworth Foundation), I also can relate to the
reluctance of project leaders to be seen as "biting the hand that
feeds (or fed) them."

And I'm sure you're all generally sick of talking about this

One thing that I did overlook, as Göran pointed out, is that even if
Apple would relicense its code, that subsequent contributions,
particularly those of Disney, would still be covered by the SqueakL. 
On one hand, nobody other than Apple has any interest whatsoever in
maintaining the clauses in the SqueakL that only protect Apple in the
first place.  On the other, getting Disney's attention on the matter
seems even harder than getting Apple's, and Disney's overall
relationship to free software and free culture (Free Mickey!) is
contentious to say the least.

However, I don't think this statement by Göran is accurate:

"If I write code and publish it under GPL or the MIT license - it
*still* is copyrighted by me and I can *still* change or revoke the
license as I see fit."

You cannot retroactively revoke the license on software you've
distributed, unless perhaps if the orignal license explicitly give the
author the rights to do so.  Needless to say, any license which could
be revoked in this way would not be free software by any definition. 
Therefore, there is no "risk" of Disney deciding the simplest solution
is to revoke the SqueakL on their part of the code (as he alluded to
in his email to me).

I don't want to force another long thread on you.  Here's what I'm
weighing right now:

1) is the likelihood of getting a positive response from Disney high
enough to bother going ahead with a petition, etc?

2) would it be better to request that the copyright be transferred to
the Squeak Foundation than to request the software be relicensed?

If I decide "yes" to 1), I'll come back to the Squeak community about 2).

I'd also just note that this issue is much bigger potentially than the
Squeak community.  For example, it seems extremely likely that this
issue could rate a post on boingboing.net, since Apple, Disney and
intellectual property issues are three of Cory Doctorow's favorite
subjects.  BoingBoing had over 2 million "unique visitors" last month.

--Tom



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list