1 |
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 09:28:24PM +0100, Mike Auty wrote: |
2 |
> One of the packages I maintain (nipper) has recently undergone a change |
3 |
> of license, from being GPLed to a new license that whilst mostly being |
4 |
> commercial features a non-commercial/personal use element. |
5 |
The website stills says GPL v3: |
6 |
http://nipper.titania.co.uk/licensing.php |
7 |
|
8 |
Reading the license, I'm really wondering why the change was made. |
9 |
It feels like it was written by a lawyer with little to no understanding |
10 |
of open source licensing - with the sole purpose of producing revenue, |
11 |
without regards as to the rights of the user. Additionally, the lawyer |
12 |
is not cognizant of some issues in the jurisdiction of the contract. |
13 |
|
14 |
> Due to the new license (and the no redistribution of any kind bits) the |
15 |
> package will need mirror/fetch restrictions, which is fine. My concern |
16 |
> is with the copyright clause which states: |
17 |
... |
18 |
> I'm wondering how this might affect any in-tree patching, because whilst |
19 |
> I'm aware of this clause and happy to send any patches upstream and/or |
20 |
> not patch at all, I can't say the same for every Gentoo dev that might |
21 |
> want to fix a problem. |
22 |
I'm answering this further down. |
23 |
|
24 |
> I know the upstream author personally, and he's providing the |
25 |
> source-code primarily for Gentoo users (we can always use the existing |
26 |
> binary RPMs if patching is an issue), but I thought I should ask what |
27 |
> the best course of action would be here? |
28 |
Try hard to persuade him not to pursue this license. Alternatively, |
29 |
dual-license instead of applying this license only. If his userbase |
30 |
cares enough about the product, they're going to fork after seeing this |
31 |
new license. |
32 |
|
33 |
Similar to the TrueCrypt issue, I'd say do NOT commit any ebuild covered |
34 |
by this license until the matter is resolved. |
35 |
|
36 |
IANAL, but I do follow lots of open-source licensing, and occasionally |
37 |
help organizations in compliance with open-source licensing, so here are |
38 |
my comments on various portions of the license. At least two clauses are |
39 |
unenforceable or outright illegal in some parts of the world. Several |
40 |
more are at the very least questionable. |
41 |
|
42 |
> LICENCE AGREEMENT FOR NIPPER |
43 |
... |
44 |
> By installing, copying, downloading, accessing or otherwise using NIPPER you agree to |
45 |
> be bound by the terms of this Agreement. If you do not agree to the terms of this |
46 |
> agreement you may not download, install or use NIPPER. |
47 |
Click-through licenses are invalid in many jurisdictions. Additionally, |
48 |
there's no provision in the license, for anybody to be bound by the |
49 |
license simply for downloading it and NOT unpacking it. |
50 |
|
51 |
> 2.1 This Licence relates to all versions of NIPPER developed by the Licensor. The |
52 |
> Licensor reserves all rights. |
53 |
Nope, if previous versions were under GPL, they remain under it. They |
54 |
may be additionally licensed under new terms, but the GPL remains in |
55 |
effect AS well. |
56 |
|
57 |
> 3.1 End User Commercial Use Licence |
58 |
... |
59 |
> 3.2 System Integrator Commercial Use Licence |
60 |
(I'd say Gentoo might fit under System Integrator, but certainly not |
61 |
Commercial). |
62 |
|
63 |
> 3.3.3 The Licensee may only use NIPPER for up to five (5) Devices. Any additional |
64 |
> use will require a Commercial Use license. |
65 |
This is bizarre. So a Not-for-profit organization or university couldn't |
66 |
use it for their IT infrastructure. |
67 |
|
68 |
> 4.2 The Licensor reserves the right to revise the Licence at any time without |
69 |
> notice. The current licence terms are available from the Licensors web site. |
70 |
This clause is invalid is many jurisdictions. |
71 |
http://www.out-law.com/page-8328 (covers UK and US) |
72 |
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090508/0212134792.shtml (US) |
73 |
Specifically, all parties MUST agree to a change for it to be valid. |
74 |
Additionally since the license granted in 3.3.1 does not expire, you can |
75 |
continue to use it forever without agree to the change. |
76 |
|
77 |
> 5. Technical Support |
78 |
> 5.1 Unless otherwise arranged, technical support for NIPPER is provided through |
79 |
> the Licensor's web site http://www.titania.co.uk |
80 |
Some lawyers would say that due to this clause can't offer support for |
81 |
the packaging of Nipper on Bugzilla? |
82 |
|
83 |
> Any patches or updates that the Licensee may develop for NIPPER must |
84 |
> be immediately submitted to the Licensor. In addition, the Licensee |
85 |
> will forthwith transfer without charge all current and future rights |
86 |
> including copyrights and other intellectual property rights relating |
87 |
> to such updates to the Licensor. |
88 |
Gentoo is NOT a licensee under any of the classes of use listed in the |
89 |
license. We don't use it, and we're not a commercial integrator. Ergo |
90 |
there is a loophole that allows us to patch it without losing our rights |
91 |
to the patches. HOWEVER, I'd be concerned that the context |
92 |
(non-modified) portions of the path are still bound by the original |
93 |
license, and would violate non-distribution. |
94 |
|
95 |
-- |
96 |
Robin Hugh Johnson |
97 |
Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy |
98 |
E-Mail : robbat2@g.o |
99 |
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 |