Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 01:33:17 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: jkh@zippy.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: reg@shale.csir.co.za, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Apple's open source... Message-ID: <199903180133.SAA25941@usr01.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <98145.921708330@zippy.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Mar 17, 99 02:05:30 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > At the very least they're in violation of the BSD advertising clause... > > I don't want to get into the "larger issues" here right now (too > busy), but I just wanted to point out that the BSD advertising clause > (and the documentation credit clause which follows it) has since been > shown to be legally unenforceable. It counts for nothing. Can you cite this? I have a copy of the Opinion by the judge in the USL vs. UCB/BSDI suit, rendered in regard to the countersuit by UCB against USL, that states that it *is* enforceable. Note that this isn't a Judgement, merely an Opinion following the pretrial motions. It was my understanding that this statement, in combination with other statements regarding the potential merits of the USL claims rendered in the same Opinion were the reason USL decided to pursue a settlement. As an Opinion, it doesn't bear much weight, but if you were to pursue a similar claim in the same venue (the 5th US District Court), I find it unlikely that you wouldn't get a similar answer. In addition, since the UCB license doesn't contain a severability clause, it seems to me that if that license term was held to be invalid, that the license as a whole would be held to be invalid. And since the license is the only thing granting you rights to use the code, your right to use the code would be revoked, pending you obtaining a relicense from the original author(s) and/or assigns. So while you may not like the so-called advertising clause because you buy into Stallman's erroneous arguments about "pile on" (which only occurs when mentioning (a) features, or (b) use, of the software), holding the license to be invalid is not in your best interests, unless you have already obtained the source under an alternate license. I'm pretty sure neither I, not John Dyson, nor Sean Eric Fagin have been approached about alternate licensing... Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903180133.SAA25941>