Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 22:51:25 +0300 (EEST) From: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> To: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FYI: Plan9 open sourced Message-ID: <20030621224903.P24605-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> In-Reply-To: <200306211847.h5LIlIPF092303@bitblocks.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, Bakul Shah wrote: > > > >I don't think section seven (export control) should appear in a truly free > > > >licence. > > > > > > Why not? It's just a specific instance of the general disclaimer of > > > liability found in many licenses, including the BSD and MIT licenses. > > > > Because without it, a random person outside the US receiving it would > > technicaly (ignoring cruise missle diplomacy) not be bound by US export > > regulations. By using code under this licence, it is no longer (as far as > > that and derived code is concerned) no longer the case. > > With or without clause 7, if you are in the US, you _are_ > bound by its laws including export control regulations. If > you are living outside the US, you are _NOT_ bound by US > laws. The plan 9 lawyers are simply making this explicit. > You need to re-read the licence. A licence can (and the plan 9 one does) explicitly require you to comply with the US export regulations. This may not be a valid clause in some jurisdictions, but the fact remains that that is what > If from US you shipped a FreeBSD CD with some prohibited bits > to North Korea you are in the same trouble regradless of what > the FreeBSD license says. Basically all free software (or > may be all software) originating in the US is in the same > boat. The way I heard it, shipping bits without any crypto > (so that cryto bits can be added later) can also run afoul of > the law. If true that is truly frightening:-( The irony is > that these laws hurt people in the US more than anyone else. > Thats largely the problem of the people inside the US - vote for people who can clean up the shop. > Nevertheless, if the license is the *only* reason you are not > using plan 9 and you want to influence the license it makes a > lot more sense to discuss it with the plan 9 people rather > than here. I do think plan 9 has a lot of very useful things > that can benefit *BSDs and think that the license is open > enough to start using them -- the only reason I brought this > up in the first place. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030621224903.P24605-100000>