That is quite true. Maybe that would be a good place to start. If who 
have contributed to Squeak agree to relicense code that they have 
contributed then maybe that would help influence Apple.

However, before contributor agreement is requested it somewhat needs to 
be clear what licensing options they will agree to since it would be 
unknown as to what Apple will agree to. Hopefully most would be friendly 
towards relicensing to any more generous license Apple agrees to.

Maybe we can start a drive to get consent so that we know where we stand.

Didn't someone produce a list of contributors once upon a time?
If that code for creating the list is available maybe it could be rerun 
on a current image.

Just a thought.

Jimmie Houchin

Andrew C. Greenberg wrote:
> As much as I agree with this (and like BSD over any other alternatives 
> suggested to date), merely obtaining Apple's consensus would not 
> suffice.  The Intellectual Property in Squeak is owned by each and every 
> one of the contributors (or their employers if developed during scope of 
> employment) thereafter.  Not only Apple, but each and every other 
> contributor would also have to sign on to the new license, or in the 
> alternative, the contributions excised.
> 
> On Saturday, February 22, 2003, at 11:02 AM, Hannes Hirzel wrote:
> 
>> Jimmie Houchin <jhouchin at texoma.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Due to this I proposed in a different email approaching Apple with a BSD
>>> type license. This covers their legal requirements while being a
>>> reasonably understood and minimal license much in the spirit of the
>>> Squeak community.
>>>
>>> Jimmie Houchin
>>
>>
>> I second this proposal.
>>
>> Hannes Hirzel