From nobody Mon May 27 14:15:54 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4VnyPq4jqcz5LCQp for ; Mon, 27 May 2024 14:16:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portmaster@bsdforge.com) Received: from udns.ultimatedns.net (udns.ultimatedns.net [24.113.41.81]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "ultimatedns.net", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4VnyPq1rkVz46j7 for ; Mon, 27 May 2024 14:16:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portmaster@bsdforge.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=ultimatedns.net header.s=mx99 header.b=ZOvHYVOG; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of portmaster@bsdforge.com has no SPF policy when checking 24.113.41.81) smtp.mailfrom=portmaster@bsdforge.com Received: from ultimatedns.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by udns.ultimatedns.net (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTP id 44REFt7q041275; Mon, 27 May 2024 07:16:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from portmaster@bsdforge.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=ultimatedns.net; s=mx99; t=1716819361; x=1716819961; r=y; bh=regGPrwyl55LFdjn83AcgSjwcZLpYUbgtPyn3CB1Fqg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=ZOvHYVOGu5lprBHSdAYGlMvfo2yd2tffGbcZKu1//kolOVPSNDA/uKjLdfXDeW1YW cwV8N3y03WumdIdgRTpAJvXbVDaYknL2ArDJfuSMyQ4OUMibwdldmQD3FLCIcMIQ49 O7O5/WIvS1Ndmwf8Nl6Fp5Swam1RgZS06NY37QzudYbsGOwgqmG+MLHI0zqp+hQUtR a/TZfWj9SFzuspVfDUznywSxcg32/UHX2Hr3Ufi6oa8fzajPR0D+EIW/DrNdDAYmeU 2xyNKC5veFQ5AfLMV3mgMqswDsJsfV521SMEx4gSfGWDuB2Um9AFyr5O+uNiD/r9d5 UorT2pr4ver8w== List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 07:15:54 -0700 From: Chris To: Tatsuki Makino Cc: Daniel Engberg , David Wolfskill , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Maintainer] Help determining proper LICENSE for x11-wm/piewm? In-Reply-To: <31f1e03a487d7eb51d31708a6e049039@bsdforge.com> References: <75509267a0aa1d26562be79e8dcee41f@mail.infomaniak.com> <31f1e03a487d7eb51d31708a6e049039@bsdforge.com> User-Agent: UDNSMS/17.0 Message-ID: <632ceec17bd558b19a033422ff5a13e5@bsdforge.com> X-Sender: portmaster@bsdforge.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spamd-Bar: ++ X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=multimap; Matched map: local_wl_ip X-Spamd-Result: default: False [2.00 / 15.00]; R_DKIM_REJECT(1.00)[ultimatedns.net:s=mx99]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; ASN(0.00)[asn:11404, ipnet:24.113.0.0/16, country:US]; local_wl_ip(0.00)[24.113.41.81]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[hotmail.com]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[ultimatedns.net:-] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4VnyPq1rkVz46j7 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