Date: Sun, 26 Mar 1995 16:47:36 EST From: "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" <kaleb@x.org> To: hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: httpd as part of the system. Message-ID: <9503262147.AA05686@fedora.x.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of Sun, 26 Mar 1995 12:58:33 PST. <25494.796251513@freefall.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Jordon, did I do something wrong freebsd policy wise? I have several > > pending requests for a 1.1.5.1 version of mosaic-2.5, but don't > > want to cause trouble... > > Not at all. I've also read the SWiM manual, and it certainly gives one > every reason to expect that this is perfectly reasonable. > > Not that I haven't also occasionally had my suspicions. For example, > one could release a staticly linked copy of MOAT (the TCL Motif shell) > and export, for all practicaly purposes, the ENTIRE MOTIF API! Folks > could bang out large apps in MOAT without ever having to know or care > about the Motif license. This makes me somewhat suspicious about > a possible disparity between the letter and the intent of the law! :-) > As the risk of belaboring the issue, all I wanted to do was make sure you were aware of the legal issues. As you may recall there was a big fuss made when NCSA first shipped Mosaic binaries. Andriesson (sp?) et al were quick to point out that a) they used 1.1.4 to build the binaries because of the license terms on 1.2.x (which 1.1.x is not subject to), and b) that they had double checked with OSF before shipping Mosaic to confirm their legal position. Since you're now obviously aware of the issues, and have stated that you don't believe there's a problem, I will return to lurker mode. :-) -- Kaleb
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9503262147.AA05686>