I didn't intend to request re-discussion of every single problem again - I think some have clear solutions. For example, the export clause, which is non-free, IIUC, by applying to non-US people a law that generally doesn't apply to them, can be converted into something like "comply with the law", which is probably silly, but also not prejudicial.

Actually, I missed the objection to the indemnfication clause there, because I couldn't find the precise mail in which the objection was raised (though I've seen it sometime today).

Anyway, that's a shopping list we need to find solutions to/be certain enough they aren't serious (for example, the language complaint is not serious).

Daniel

Tim Rowledge tim@sumeru.stanford.edu wrote:

...

---

6. Export Law Assurances. You may not use or otherwise export or reexport the Apple Software except as authorized by United States law and the laws of the jurisdiction in which the Apple Software was obtained.

Doesn`t this alone makes it non-free? I think we have discussed it several times what it means when licenses explicite referes to some laws which "isn`t DFSG-free". I think that it makes the license non-free, but I don`t remember what we have agreed on.

---

To the best of my understanding this is implicit no matter what you put in your license. Federal law stands whether you mention it or not. If the existence of this condition makes something non-free then there's a lot of software that is non-free; for example rather a lot of Gnu code that was written in the US. http://www.eff.org/CAF/law/software-export-law has lots of stuff that seems related including specific mention of software with encryption capabilities; Squeak may well count (DESPlugin, MD5Plugin etc).

-- Tim Rowledge, tim@sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim Strange OpCodes: BW: Branch on Whim _______________________________________________ Squeakfoundation mailing list Squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation