From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: From: David Presotto To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Plan9 licence clarification In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="upas-nrdxozhquyxogialuviqpbfcgi" Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:52:46 -0500 Topicbox-Message-UUID: f214cbda-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --upas-nrdxozhquyxogialuviqpbfcgi Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've got to be more precise here, obviously. The license talks about two types of people (that can be the same of course); contributors and distributors. If you want what you wrote to be a contribution, you must affirmatively say it somewhere (like email to the Labs or 9fans containing the contribution or announcing it to the web). You are then a contributor and your contribution and you are protected by the license should anyone distribute it. A contributor also is required to provide source and required to provide a 'royalty free patent license...' to anyone that accepts the license. If you want to distribute something containing plan9 source or plan9 binaries you are a distributor (D). A distributor can distribute under a different license and doesn't have to disclose any source that it not a 'contribution'. However, D's license must be compatible with ours, i.e., must have similar cover your ass clauses (see the license for specifics, but I believe most OSI licenses would be satisfactory). Also, if the distribution is commercial (for recompense of some sort) the distributor must indemnify all contributors against suits brought as a result of actions taken by the distributor (false claims, bad software, malicious behavior, ...). If you link your code with our libraries and distribute, we have taken that not to be a distribution since the only people that can run it are somehow in the chain of licensee or distributor so that they would already have the libraries. If you don't want to trust us always being that nice, you can distribute your own object files without the libraries since the end user can link anyways. The salient point is that SOURCE YOU WRITE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE MADE PUBLIC unless you call it a contribution. So if you want to base something on Plan 9 (including hacking kernel and libraries) but don't want to give away your work, you can do so. However, if you want to make money off of it, you have to take financial responsibility for your actions. --upas-nrdxozhquyxogialuviqpbfcgi Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Received: from plan9.cs.bell-labs.com ([135.104.9.2]) by plan9; Mon Feb 23 10:24:40 EST 2004 Received: from mail.cse.psu.edu ([130.203.4.6]) by plan9; Mon Feb 23 10:24:37 EST 2004 Received: by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server, from userid 60001) id 084AF19D90; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:24:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.4.6]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id BB4F119B98; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:24:25 -0500 (EST) X-Original-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Received: by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server, from userid 60001) id 08F4E19D77; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:23:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from einstein.ssz.com (unknown [207.200.56.4]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id A2C9419A77 for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:23:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (ravage@localhost) by einstein.ssz.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/SuSE Linux 0.5) with ESMTP id i1NFOlc28594; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:24:47 -0600 From: Jim Choate To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Cc: Subject: Re: [9fans] Plan9 licence clarification In-Reply-To: <4a16953fbf9c2b343f2014b9264ed5d2@plan9.bell-labs.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu Errors-To: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu> List-Archive: Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:24:47 -0600 (CST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on psuvax1.cse.psu.edu X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DSBL,RCVD_IN_NJABL, RCVD_IN_NJABL_RELAY autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Level: ** On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, David Presotto wrote: > The intention is that linking with our libraries not be considered > contributing or redistributing, i.e., you can distribute without > that being considered part of 'the original program'. > > However, if you include the source of the libraries (or any other > part of the system) that is protected by the license constraints. And there is no requirement to provide source if you include the binaries. So, I can build a project and link it into P9 and as long as no P9 source goes with it I'm ok? The license (Open or Closed) with regard to the project is not relevant. Only whether I provide P9 source. If I do include any source from P9 then I must provide souce to the product/program/extension. Correct? -- -- Open Forge, LLC 24/365 Onsite Support for PCs, Networks, & Game Consoles 512-695-4126 (Austin, Tx.) help@open-forge.com Hangar 18 Open Source Distributed Computing Using Plan 9 & Linux 512-451-7087 http://open-forge.org/hangar18 James Choate 512-451-7087 ravage@ssz.com jchoate@open-forge.com --upas-nrdxozhquyxogialuviqpbfcgi--