Colin Putney wrote:
> In many cases
> we'll get responses like, "Sure, but Disney owns the copyright on 
> everything I did between this date and that." That's fine. It whittles 
> down the encumbered code a bit and ads to our knowledge base.
> 
> At some point, between new code being free and older code being freed, 
> we'll have a really clear set of core modules that we can take to Apple 
> and/or Disney. I'm sure that better preparation on our part will make 
> that negotiation easier.

Not Disney. Alan pointed out multiple times that all additions to the 
base system are not Disney's. The "real stuff" done while SqC was at 
Disney has never been released publicly. They very strictly 
distinguished between modifications of the base system which were 
published, and work building on that involving all kinds of shiny stuff 
that Disney is famous for (*).

The great thing is that SqueakL allowed this! You _can_ do serious work 
with Squeak under the current license. Otherwise Disney's lawyers would 
have very much objected.

This whole discussion is very much a tempest in a teacup. To put it into 
perspective: There is no problem whatsoever with providing downloads of 
Squeak for Windows or Macintosh or even selling it. There is also no 
problem with providing downloads for Linux (we will even have RPMs for 
the next release!). Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The only issue (apart from weltanschauung) is including Squeak in some 
OS by default. I doubt Microsoft will do that. Neither will Apple. Not 
even if we change the license to include a free chocolate bar for them. 
;-) So the majority of users will have to download or buy Squeak by 
themselves anyway.

However, Linux distros might include Squeak by default, and that is an 
opportunity, because it should get us some publicity. We should work 
onthat. Apple stated they won't release Squeak under APSL because they 
are not actively involved anymore, so that discussion is moot.

I personally would like to have Squeak under a licence I can pretend to 
understand, like the two paragraphs of BSD. If Alan could get Steve to 
approve that, it would be great. But just fixing SqueakL to the extent 
that OSI approves it (optionally FSF, too) would be sufficient, too. 
Whatever we can get Apple to do. However, the status quo isn't as bad as 
  is might sound in this thread.

-- Bert

(*) You can catch a glimpse at how pretty that stuff must have been by 
opening the paint tool.