Re: To Alex

"Sorry. Sometimes I *do* have to get some work done :-). I followed up
your earlier post with appropriate comments.
cheers, "

? What ? No....lete me explain this.

Just to clear up....On the time i posted for an answer ..Your previous
post was not showing here..

Now about your answer:

You are misinterpretating the license, but...ok..i´ll explain it.
Afterall you don´t have obligation to understand how to interpret
legal issues ;) If it was hard for me to build it, i can imagine how
hard it can be for your to interpret it.

Clause 19 is the one related to the usage of the program for civilian
people. All people described there are allowed freely to use,
distribute and do whatever they wants (Of course, respecting the terms
of the license and it´s purposes stated in all previous clauses). So,
shools/universities are allowed to use them (By it´s students,
teachers, academic corps etc), any single person, civil organizatinos
or institutes, research centers etc...and all non governamental
agencies....So, as it is stated at the end of the paragraph, all others
people (juridic or a individual) that are related to a civilian or
humanitarian purporses.

So, i was correct....Schools are allowed to use them, and the sentence
does not restrict the usage of the term "shcool" as you are leading
people to think that way...

You won´t appologyse for ssaying that is stated literally that a
school is forbidden to use ? No problem....I wasn´t exactly expecting
that you could be humble enough to apologise on that subject, but
well...

Clause 20, is specific for restrict the usage for military and
para-military, or any belic agencies or individuals. The usage of those
people/institutes/agencies related to military or governamental or
belic purposes must be authorized.

This is _not_ unusual. I remember reading a similar clause on a M$
license (Not Eula...i don´t remmeber now where i read it, but i did
read), and also we can have a clause that imposes restrictions to
governamental usage in any sort of contract, specially when this
contract (In case this License) is focused to civilian and humanitary
people/organizatinos/institutes.

You may state that it is uthopia think that a governamental agency
would use RosAsm anyhow....Well...i agree...the odds for that happens
are almost null....But they are NOT null.

Restriting the license for military/governamental purposes is totally
Ok to do. As i caid ...i can restrict the license if i don´t want a
specific usage of the product. This does not applyes only for
RosAsm..This applyes to licenses, generally speaking.

Noone knows the future of a open-source and free project. We cannnot
tell if a product (Not talking in RosAsm specifically, but) will be
used to para-military agencies, for example building a program that is
used by drug dealers (organized cartel, or para-military ones), or any
other belic reason. My point is that If a free and open-source product
is good enough, _anyone_ can use it. And if you don´t impose any sort
of restrictino, the whole project can bring bad results or bad usages.

Again...it seems inverosimel, it seems utopic...but it _is_ a
possibility. I´m not talking specifically that a governamental or
para-military agency will have any interest in RosAsm itself - If this
should be your next move to discredit the license - but, as long as it
is free and open-source we can at least try to avoid any Link with
those purposes.

If you now try to make me proof where in M$ i read something similar,
i´ll only answer that i actually don´t rememeber where in the dozens
of different licenses i read that. (I would say hundreds...but it was
not hundreds..i guess i interpreted about 80 licenses at total,
including US, french, germain, italian, and Brasilian). Of course that
it _is_ 100% impossible to build a license to be used in many different
legislations of different countries. So trying to adapt it to best fit
for them all and also make it be _compatible_ with the purpose or the
GNU Foundation was not exactly a easy thing to do.

So, if you want to make a research if a similar clause exists, you can
try on msdn/ or main m$ site...i remember i was reading some licenses
in one of the links inside when i was researching the US laws and
trying to see some examples of american licenses....

Clause 20 states only that the usage for those agencies, institutes
(governamental or para-military etc) must be authorized previously,
after request.


So, if a boy-scout agency/entity is a para-military organization (I
really don´t know..i never heard that boy scout were para-military or
have any link with military agencies before) you can use upon request.
Simple as that.

It is a matter of misinterpretation of you. I can perfectly understand
it, but it does not make any right of you misleading others to think
that a School (Civilian institue, innocent students ot teachers) are
forbidden to use it.

And for that i would ask for an appology, since as there are _no_
forbidden clause stating to school.

I hope i can explained that properly.

It is hard for me to make legal statements in public, due to my ethical
code - which i´m obligated to follow. I have no idea if in US a lawyer
can make any free statement (I assume it can be done, because as far i
can remember in US lawyer are allowed to make publicity also), but here
i must do such statements with limitatinos (And we are not free to make
publicity ... we have restrictions that must fit the ethical
purpose...It is hard to explain, anyway. I didn´t built my ehtical
code, but i must obbey it).

I ask you (and also ask Steve) to not force me to answer specific
things about the license on this way. I can explain to the proper board
in a sort of Faq in RosAsm board, if a RosAsm user eventually ask or
question such things, but i can´t make it freely in public just to
respond to attacks or misintrepretatinos of non-rosasm users.

I hope it is explained and i hope you understood and won´t try to
distort my words once again.

Best Regards

Guga

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Avoiding LispWorks Personal annoyances
    ... licenses modification clause either. ... The license specifically prohibits reverse engineering, full stop, ... Publishing it in a public forum neither serves self-interest ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: FC4 or FC5
    ... Nothing in most proprietary licenses restrict them being linked into ... The GPL is a copyright license. ... If there is no legal way around this, Suse Desktop will be a thing of the past ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: National Reciprocity Amendment Possibly Up for Vote Today
    ... If your marriage license and your drivers license is ... It's a good avenue of attack, i.e. the clause that says each state will give ...
    (rec.guns)
  • Re: FC4 or FC5
    ... Nothing in most proprietary licenses restrict them being linked into ... You would not be allowed to redistribute that linked work ... The GPL is a copyright license. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Java problem
    ... that the license prevents you from hijacking the code. ... I'm not interested in hijacking anything. ... isn't ok to distribute the code with the source and restrict how you ... I want everyone to have access to the innovations that would have been possible without the GPL restrictions on combining works. ...
    (Fedora)