Date: Mon, 26 Jun 1995 23:54:04 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> To: mark@grondar.za (Mark Murray) Cc: wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu, mark@grondar.za, ache@astral.msk.su, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Crypt code summary(2). Message-ID: <199506270654.XAA05823@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> In-Reply-To: <199506261922.VAA14460@grumble.grondar.za> from "Mark Murray" at Jun 26, 95 09:22:34 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > >> Which I would be STRONGLY opposed to having in the source tree. > > > > > Why? You have voiced an opinion for another package (I cannot remember its > > > name). Lets hear some argument for this. I would like _something_. > > > > 1. RSAREF is free for personal or corporate use under the > > following conditions: > > > > o RSAREF, RSAREF applications, and services based on > > RSAREF applications may not be sold. > > Does selling a `free' operating system for the distribution costs on CDROM > count as `selling'? Walnut Creek is selling these CDROM's high about what would be considered ``distribution costs''. They _are_ a for profit company, and do make a profit!! > Is FreeBSD (as opposed to the CDROM) actually `sold'? (This question could > easily sink to semantics, I know. Lets try to keep it sane. Yes, it is sold, some times even for more than you would ever think possible. > GNU may not be sold either. We have GNU. (Not much, and the license makes it > a bit funny, but when you need it, you need it). Nothing in the GNU license says you can't sell GNU binaries, heck RTR software makes a full time profitable business compiling and selling GNU binaries. It simply says you have to provide the sources at cost of distribution, but it says nothing about what you can make for profit from building BINARIES!!! > > o You must give RSA the source code of any free RSAREF > > application you plan to distribute or deploy within > > your company. RSA will make these applications > > available to the public, free of charge. > > What is the problem here? We _want_ to do this. We are going to do it anyway. You are *NOT* going to make RSA part of the FreeBSD source tree, no how, no way, nodda, forget it, it is way way way to much legalize involved with even touching RSA code in the USA!!!! You think the State Department and DES is a pain, wait until you see what a company that holds a patent on something you are using can do to you for screwing around with it! I don't want to put FreeBSD or Walnut Creek in that possition, nor would I want any person buying FreeBSD to be put into that possition. Do it as a port, period. Garrett is right on this one, and I am going to back him up 100%. > > > 4. You must use the interface described in the RSAREF > > documentation. > > For European users, this does not kill RSAEURO. It is the same interface. > -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation Company Reliable computers for FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199506270654.XAA05823>