[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: disadvantages of Artistic license ?
From:       mosfet <mosfet () mandrakesoft ! com>
Date:       2000-02-27 2:38:46
[Download RAW message or body]

Don Sanders wrote:
> 
> > This is the crux of the argument. Don said that derived source code must
> > remain under the XFree license. I say it doesn't. Code remaining under
> > the XFree license I *think* has to have sources available because of
> > what I quoted above (permission is hereby granted ... to deal with the
> > Sofware without restriction ... modify, merge, etc...). But you can
> > change that in derived works.
> >
> > Another complication is if source licenses apply to binaries, or are
> > derived works. Evidently Australia thinks not, but I find that
> > questionable.
> 
> As it turns out at the time (early 80's) the Federal Court/High Court
> decisions was made binaries weren't considered adaptions of the source code,
> in fact binaries weren't considered literary works and perhaps no inherent
> copyright was given to the creator a binary program.
> 
> Since those decisions (or more precisely because of those decisions) the law
> in Australia was amended. The definition of adaption was amended to cover
> binary programs created from source code, and "computer program" (I think
> both source code and binary forms) was defined to be literary work and hence
> subject to copyright.
> 
> So Australian law seems to have been brought into line with other countries.
> 
> In regards to the MIT license this does puzzle me somewhat. Was the
> distribution of binaries common when the MIT license was created? I wonder it
> the creator of the license just didn't think about binaries.
> 

Dunno, but the above has a lot of implications outside of the MIT
license...

> > Well, I have been saying that the Xfree license *itself* seems to
> > require sources, but that you don't have to follow it in derived works.
> > Don disagrees with the latter
> 
> I disagree with the former I said:
> The MIT license is not a copyleft license and doesn't require the source code
> to be made available when binaries are distributed.
> 
> Perhaps it would help by stating it this way, if someone gave me some MIT
> licensed source code then I am permitted to modify that source code and give
> that modified version to you (license under the MIT license) and I never have
> to give you a copy of the original source code I received.
> 
> The latter requires clarification:
> When creating a derived work based on the source code the MIT license doesn't
> apply to parts of the derived work that don't contain either copies of the
> source code or substantial portions of the source code. So if I create an X
> server using some MIT source code files I only have to keep the MIT source
> code files bit of it under the MIT license. New files I've created can be
> licensed under whatever license I choose.
>

Cool, which is fine (and you can make GPL apps with it).
 
> > All I was trying to demonstrate is that derived works of XFree don't
> > have to follow the MIT license. And the only reason I was trying to do
> > that was a new KDE developer was asking what non-GPL licenses are okay
> > and Don told him the MIT license was GPL incompatible ;) I usually don't
> > get involved in discussions like this :P <grin>
> 
> Hmm, that's strange I thought I said:
> <quote>
> There have been some interesting points made about the Xfree license on
> kde-licensing. I would suggest researching the Xfree license on kde-licensing
> before using it, especially if you are intending to mix Xfree and GPL code,
> (rather than just having GPL code link to an Xfree library).
> </quote>
> 
> I don't remember using the word incompatible that would have been horribly
> ambiguous.
>

Well, okay - it was implied... either way it's confusing to new
developers, which aren't going to be sitting around reading the
arguments on kde-licensing.

> BFN,
> Don.

-- 
Daniel M. Duley - Unix developer & sys admin.
http://www.mosfet.org - The place for KDE development news.
mosfet@mandrakesoft.com
mosfet@kde.org

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]