openSUSE Sports a New License (Ding dong, the EULAs dead )
The work weve done on the openSUSE Build Service and the openSUSE license is all about making it easy to redistribute openSUSE: Either as-is, or modified to suit your needs. Want to ship an Xfce or KDE 3.5 live CD? We want to make that easy. Want to use openSUSE for another project that we havent thought of? Again - we want you to, and we want to make it easy! (And, of course, we want you to have a lot of fun while youre doing this – though our lawyers tell us thats not legally enforceable.)" The text of the new license is also available.
Posted Nov 26, 2008 15:34 UTC (Wed)
by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)
[Link]
Posted Nov 26, 2008 16:10 UTC (Wed)
by epa (subscriber, #39769)
[Link] (7 responses)
Posted Nov 26, 2008 16:46 UTC (Wed)
by zotz (guest, #26117)
[Link] (6 responses)
Actually can you wrap anything around a GPL program that another person holds copyrights to?
Wouldn't that be trying to add additional terms? (Or couldn't it?)
all the best,
drew
Posted Nov 26, 2008 20:08 UTC (Wed)
by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330)
[Link] (2 responses)
The only questionable part is "using", as in using a program that someone else has installed for you. But someone who just does that isn't going to see this text in any case.
Posted Nov 27, 2008 0:04 UTC (Thu)
by bluss (guest, #47454)
[Link]
Posted Nov 27, 2008 3:31 UTC (Thu)
by zotz (guest, #26117)
[Link]
(I have my doubts that what you say is correct anyway, but even if you are, it doesn't address the issue I raise.)
What you say would only hold if the license agreement was the GPL, no changes. And what if the distro should contain multiple copyleft licensed programs. Is that clearer?
First I am trying to be sure we understand each other correctly, after that, if we still disagree, we can go from there.
all the best,
drew
Posted Nov 27, 2008 14:28 UTC (Thu)
by MKesper (subscriber, #38539)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Nov 27, 2008 16:57 UTC (Thu)
by epa (subscriber, #39769)
[Link]
Posted Nov 30, 2008 4:56 UTC (Sun)
by leshachek (guest, #49071)
[Link]
openSUSE Sports a New License (Ding dong, the EULAs dead
)
Hmm, it still seems to be an EULA
By downloading, installing, or using openSUSE 11.1, you agree to the terms of this agreement.
Isn't this the fundamental objection - that it claims you agree to something just by using a computer program? Surely it should say instead 'you do not have to accept this agreement, since you have not signed it', as the GPL does. Then it would not have a claim (which is either misleading or dangerous, depending on your point of view) to impose additional restrictions beyond copyright law.
Hmm, it still seems to be an EULA
If you download or install a GPL program, you are making a copy, an action that requires the permission of the copyright holder and agreement to the license. If you don't agree, then you can't copy. So I have no problems with language that says that downloading implies acceptance of the free software licenses on the code in the distro.
Hmm, it still seems to be an EULA
Hmm, it still seems to be an EULA
Hmm, it still seems to be an EULA
Hmm, it still seems to be an EULA
If you read through carefully, you'll notice that it basically says (1) this stuff is copyrighted, (2) this stuff has no warranty and (3) you are aware that there are US export controls.
Hmm, it still seems to be an EULA
Hmm, it still seems to be an EULA
This compilation doesn't limit you to individual license neither supersedes any one. The latter one is some interesting point. Some firmware included in the distro has a proprietary nature of licensing and this license can not be superseded with an open source nature of licenses of OpenSUSE. I maybe wrong in such interpretation.