Freeing Squeak (license-wise)

Jimmie Houchin jhouchin at texoma.net
Thu Mar 13 20:12:15 UTC 2003


Marcus Denker wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 11:42:34AM -0500, Jarvis, Robert P. (Contingent) wrote:
> 
>>>How can they hurt us from where we are?
>>
>>They can say, "Thanks for bringing this to our attention.  Upon further
>>review we've concluded that there's a possibility that someone somewhere
>>might use Squeak to do something bad, so upon the advice of counsel we're
>>revoking the Squeak license in order to limit our liability.  Shut down your
>>servers and delete all Squeak-related files.  And have a nice day".
>>
>>That's what they can do.
>>
> 
> Then I have to ask: Why should I put *any* more work into Squeak? Seriously. 
> 
>         Marcus

Good question.
This why I think this is an important issue.

There are real people spending real time and real money on Squeak.
If this isn't cleared up it could hamper Squeak development.

If OpenCroquet became a great success (and all Slashdotdom bowed and 
praised ;) ) and Apple felt (or percieved) its OS threatened, and they 
had the ability to pull the plug on Squeak, this could be a problem.
Even the perception of this ability by the Squeak community or those 
looking into Squeak, it could be a problem.

If the success of Squeak or any of its projects could bring the end of 
Squeak via Apple or Disney, this is bad. Even if this only affects U.S. 
users.

Letting sleeping dogs lie or giants or whatever may sound good, but I 
would rather know now the full dislosure of the situation. Because at 
any point that GiantDog may awake and bite us. If any of us are to hope 
to build a business or income out of Squeak a resolution is important. I 
personally vote to find out where we stand and if we can improve the 
license.

Speaking only for myself. I know it can affect my decisions.

Just MHO.

Jimmie Houchin




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list