Hi Andreas,

	Well, quite honestly, I have no issues with Squeak's
current licensing, so I only care that nobody does anything
to make it worse.  GPL infection would be worse, as would
a more restrictive license, but I am perfectly satisfied
with the existing license, so I do really just wish that
people would take Alan Kay's advice and not worry about it.

	Regarding Disney and Michael's lawyers, I agree.  He
is a shrewd business man, not to be taken lightly, however
the word "Disney" does not appear in the Squeak License
anywhere.

	Also, I assume that Disney acquired Squeak under the
Squeak License?  So things done at Disney qualify as
"Modified Software", but with respect to the "existing
class objects or their existing relationships", or "any part
of the virtual machine", I'm not sure that everything added
to "official" Squeak at Disney is subject to the "must be
made publicly available".  It seems that Disney is content
to treat all of what is in the "official" Squeak images as
being subject to that clause, so I think we should just count
our blessings and move on.

	IMO, Squeak is a wonderful gift to the world, and
"looking a gift horse in the mouth" is generally to be
considered impolite at best.

					-Dean




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Raab [mailto:andreas.raab at gmx.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 7:13 PM
> To: 'The general-purpose Squeak developers list'
> Subject: RE: [ANN] Closure Compiler
> 
> 
> Hi Dean,
> 
> > 	I am admittedly assuming a worst case scenario.  You are quite
> > correct: I have no knowledge of what Apple's opinion is on this
> > matter.  My opinion is based on the idea that Apple is content with
> > the current situation and may not be receptive to entertaining a
> > dialogue.
> 
> It's somewhat surprising for me to see so many of you worry 
> about Apple. I
> think you should be much more worried about Disney and 
> Michael's lawyers in
> this discussion (which are quite a different problem compared 
> to Apple...)
> as SqC has been working for Disney for most of the time. This 
> means that
> technically speaking Disney owns 80% of what's in Squeak. Not 
> Apple. Not the
> people at SqC. Even if I wanted to, I simply could not change 
> the license of
> (say) Balloon 2D/3D as this was paid work done for Disney and 
> thus Disney
> owns it legally and is the only party who might change that 
> license. The
> same for about every other aspect in Squeak (except a few 
> bits of MVC and
> stuff that was clearly done outside).
> 
> <sarcastic> Good luck with negotiating with the Disney 
> lawyers. Whoever gets
> this done should be able to get Squeak a license to use Mickey for
> advertisement. </sarcastic>
> 
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas
> 
>