License questions.

nicolas cellier ncellier at
Tue Jan 15 22:39:19 UTC 2008

mvdg asked a good question: what is the risk?

Risk to be sued by individual contributor? seems very low to me.
Risk to be sued by major company? Not until you make money or prevent 
them to make money with a concurrent project. But then, seems higher.

On the other side, attacking projects like OLPC seems dumb: it's like 
negative advertising! But who knows...

Will the board really decide that every single wrong-licensed bit has to 
be rewritten?
Wouldn't it be better that code having higher risk be rewritten first?
I would bet code from individuals can well wait a few more years, 
anysuch trial in the database?

Hope you asked lawyers to evaluate these risks.
And that a clear strategy will emerge from this with clear priorities 
and estimation of effort kept reasonnable.


tim Rowledge a écrit :
> On 15-Jan-08, at 1:23 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:
>> tim Rowledge wrote:
>>> On 15-Jan-08, at 12:39 PM, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
>>>> Is it possible for Squeak to be considered an "Apache base with MIT 
>>>> extensions"? The base (Squeak 1.1 ) is obviously Apache licensed, 
>>>> and if you made a massive changeset of all changes since then, that 
>>>> changeset would be MIT licensed,
>>> Nope, I don't think so. Aside from a number of people with changes in 
>>> there that haven't yet signed the relicensing paperwork, there are 
>>> large chunks that (probably) belong to Disney and HP. Bloody lawyers 
>>> and big corporations...
>> HP? Can you point to any code that is in Squeak which you believe is 
>> owned by HP?
> I'm guessing (and only guessing right now) that lawyers would tell us 
> that any code written by you folks whilst employed by HP belongs to HP. 
> Do I remember explicitly what that code might include? NFW.
> So far we (as in  'the board') are finding this relicensing stuff to be 
> staggeringly complicated and nitpicky. Every antecedent version of every 
> method in the image has to be covered. The 'sublicensing' clause in the 
> original SqL doesn't seem to impress the lawyers at all.
> tim
> -- 
> tim Rowledge; tim at;
> granary - old folks home

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list