Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 12:41:39 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jason C. Wells" <jcwells@u.washington.edu> To: FreeBSD-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Changes to X11 licensing with X11R6.4 Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980411114851.245B-100000@s8-37-26.student.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <199804071524.IAA29054@kithrup.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 7 Apr 1998, Sean Eric Fagan wrote: > First of all: everyone who buys a CD-ROM must agree to the license. That > means paperwork. > > WC must now keep track of sales and give this information to a third party. > (Admittedly, they do this already to a degree, for Chuckie.) Go ask, say, Xi, > about what it's like to sell Motif. > > I read the license. It's a binary-only license. I couldn't find anything in > it about selling source licenses. I truly hope I missed something. > > Lastly, it's morally objectionable. I won't pay it. Ever. Not to The Open > Group. I must first admit that I am a latecomer to the free software community. My discussion may be impeachable in this regard. Still, I sincerely "believe" in free software. The open group documents make specific mention of XFree86 not having to pay royalties to distribute X11R6.4. Getting XFree86 X11R6.4 free of charge from the net seems feasible given the exception that TOG specifically makes. How this relates to WC putting "XFree86 royalty free X11R6.4" on a CD and selling it is beyond me. WC might be considered to have made a derived work for commercial purposes and therefore subject themselves to a royalty. I adhere to the "morally objectionable" statement made above. This is the crux of the freely available software dilemna. The same issues abound when one considers "GPL vs BSD" licensing. How do we reap the benefits of free software without being taken advantage of by commercial efforts? Should we worry about being taken advantage of? The feeling I get is that TOG does not want folks getting a free ride. Yet their is something sinister in their position. So here comes my argument... My concern and fear is the TOG have themselves gone commercial. Their website hits me as a commercial effort all the way. You sure can purchase a lot of "credibilty" (sic) from them by putting one silly brand or another from them on your software. They somehow try to spin this into a "we are doing it for your own good" issue. (IMHO) You know. FreeBSD would be a lot better if it had a "UNIX Brand" (tm) on it. JKH, fork out the license fee now !!! (heavy sarcasm) My other concern is that TOG wants to "take" from the free software community (read you and me) and give to themselves. Their position smacks of an elitism that they are the protectors of the faith looking out for the best interests of the serfdom. They want to take something that has heretofore been "free", encumber it with royalties, and then claim that they are acting in "our" best interests. Their is a big question remaining to be asked. It is eluded to on the XFree86 site. They are "considering" their position regarding the new licensing. Shall the free unix community (including all of us bsd types and linux folks) break ranks with TOG and build from X11R6.3 or fall in line with TOG? If we fall in line with TOG, then I submit that we detract from the free software cause. Regarding the TOG highly _CONTRIVED_ FAQ at http://www.camb.opengroup.org/tech/desktop/x/xlicensefaq.htm **** block quote **** Question: Will the "free" community be able to use this technology, or does this just split the industry into free and proprietary branches? Answer: X Window System technology continues to be free to the "free" community. We've heard rumblings that this change will force suppliers of "free" technology to stop shipping X11. We don't agree. Organizations like XFree86 will continue to be able to distribute X as they do today. But, companies who take the "free" technology and sell it, will not. Companies making money distributing X Window System technology should support its development. Many do not today. The end result is that there is not enough funds to keep it going. The "free" community may feels they want to reimplement the technology so they can give it away to other companies to sell. That could fragment the industry. **** end block quote **** OBTW, TOG arrogantly states the free software community could end up guilty of fragmenting the industry. This annoys me. TOG has made the split. Period. End of discussion. This statement is an attempt to villanize the folks who believe free software should be free. "There won't be enough funds..." Has there ever been enough funds? Enough funds for who? Enough funds for TOG? I am skeptical in this regard. Does FreeBSD have enough funds? Does FreeBSD enforce a roaylty? The answer is no on both counts. Well, after all this discussion, I read the XFreee86 site. Boy what a waste of typing. It seems things have already been settled. There position is here http://www.Xfree86.org/news/pr-980407.html . Most notably, "The TOG licensing change is incompatible with the goals of XFree86 and most of the free software community that have been in communication with The XFree86 Project directors over the last week." Bravo XFree86! Have fun, | Stop warning me about the latest virus. Learn more... Jason Wells | http://ciac.llnl.gov/ciac/CIACHoaxes.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980411114851.245B-100000>