Re: [Maintainer] Help determining proper LICENSE for x11-wm/piewm?
- In reply to: Chris : "Re: [Maintainer] Help determining proper LICENSE for x11-wm/piewm?"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 14:15:54 UTC
On 2024-05-27 06:52, Chris wrote: > On 2024-05-26 20:57, Tatsuki Makino wrote: >> Hello. >> What I say may turn out to be bullshit :) >> >> In short, it doesn't matter what the license is, it's how it controls >> >> Can the FreeBSD installer include built packages? >> Can packages be included on FreeBSD installer disks sold on the FreeBSD >> Mall ( >> https://www.freebsdmall.com/ ) ? >> When the distfile fails to download, can it be downloaded from >> MASTER_SITE_BACKUP? >> >> If there are no matching licenses, I think we can concoct new licenses and >> control them. >> I don't know if it's just a good example, but I think >> print/epson-inkjet-printer-escpr2 is applicable to the example where the >> license >> clause is included in the distribution file, and audio/libamrnb is >> applicable to >> the example where the license clause is not included in the distribution >> file. >> >> It's a surprisingly difficult part that needs to be done accurately, so if >> I'm >> saying something wrong, please point it out right away :) >> >> Regards. > I think you site 2 excellent examples. But in the end, isn't the onus upon > the > creator(s) of the software/source to clearly site TOU -- terms of use? > IOW with reasonable diligence, which might be a cursory look through the > source, > in an effort to find those terms. 1) Should that search return a clear > answer; fine, > problem solved. 2) Should that search turn up multiple options, with no > clear answer/ > winner. Choose any, or a text description summarizing the overall > (perceived) intent. > 3) Should that search return no results. Choose TOU/LICENSE UNKNOWN. > > Point being; a producer of an app/software should/can not require an > end-user/distributor > to be well-versed in the prevailing law(s) of their place of citizenship. > Nor to be an to be well-versed in the prevailing law(s), as they pertain to software, of their place of citizenship. Nor to be an (speaking of Due Diligence, a better proof reading wouldn't hurt.) > attorney/barrister, in order to use their software. Unless, of course, it is > only > intended for such use. > > So the answer is clearly best/reasonable effort on the individual in > possession of > said software/source. Best, or Reasonable is in the interpretation of the > individual > in possession of said software/source. > > --Chris