"Andreas Raab" <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> > Finally, I would like to point out that the different VM ports seem to
> > have different licenses (!).
> 
> This may well be. Individual ports can be released under any license as long
> as it is compatible with SqueakL.

I know that they can be. I was just not aware that they weren't all
under SqueakL, see below.

> > - The Win32/MacOS and RiscOS port has no information about 
> > license that I could find (on SF), I assume Andreas, John
> > and Tim simply intend SqueakL.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > - The Unix port has a license which is a... well. Ian has added a few
> > clauses to say the least...
> 
> Ian has added a few clauses which are perfectly compatible with SqueakL. He
> wants you to make your changes clear (by renaming the files you touch) and
> the part about using it outside of the context of Squeak constitutes
> essentially a dual license. In short it's SqueakL+GPL. I see no problems
> with this.

As I read it it is NOT a dual license. I can not use those files
according to SqueakL ONLY - if it was a dual license I could. A dual
license is when the user can *choose himself* which license to use. In
this case Ian is setting the rules.

So no, it is a further restricted SqueakL, even though the first 3
restrictions mentioned aren't that earthshattering  (one note about
misrepresentation, one about renaming files upon modification, and one
about not removing notice), they are still restrictions.

...BUT it includes this passage:
"Using (or modifying this file for use) in any context other than Squeak
changes these copyright conditions."

Then it further describes how such an act would make the files
accessible under GPL instead.

The problem here - and it sure would be nice to hear what a lawyer says
on this - what does "in any context other than Squeak" mean? If I build
a proprietary product that uses Squeak inside, is that another context?
In other words - does the context "Squeak" mean the distribution of
Squeak itself as available from www.squeak.org? It sure sounds like it
could be interpreted that way.

Anyway, it sure saddens me that Squeak has these issues. I just chatted
with Brian Rice on the Slate channel and told him how refreshingly it
sounds with Slate being under MIT.

> Cheers,
>   - Andreas

regards, Göran