Date: Sun, 26 Mar 1995 11:47:54 -0700 From: Steve Passe <fbsd@clem.systemsix.com> To: hackers@FreeBSD.org Cc: jkh@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: httpd as part of the system. Message-ID: <199503261847.LAA27713@clem.systemsix.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 26 Mar 1995 09:37:42 MST." <199503261637.JAA25157@trout.sri.MT.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Don't scare me like that so early in the morning! >> > this is stock mosaic 2.5 statically linked to motif 1.2, compiled >> > on 2.0-950322-SNAP. >> > >> >> I don't normally intrude into other people's legal affairs, but you're >> in violation of the Motif 1.2 source license, unless you're collecting >> Motif run-time royalties and sending them to OSF. Replies: > I am not a legal expert but here is what it says in the > Swim 1.2.3 for FreeBSD-1.0.2 Manual: > Page T-1: > Q: Can I link my applications statically and not worry about royalties? > A: If you link your applications with the static libraries, you are > free to distribute the resulting binary royalty free. and: > Umm, the version of Motif that was sold by SwiM(??) explicitly made it > possible that we could distribute binaries linked against it. This goes > against what was mentioned on the newsgroup, but the CS dept. at MSU was > very sure that they were completely free and legal to distribute > binaries that were linked against the version of Motif they bought. > It is version 1.2, and they did get written permission from the > distributor. I was always under the impression that I could distribute any binary made from these libs, that's why I bought them in the first place. After getting this mail I pulled my manual off the shelf and confirmed it. 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... Steve Passe smp@clem.systemsix.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199503261847.LAA27713>