Re: [cups-devel] CUPS License Change Coming

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)

--Boundary_(ID_NBqAK25oxm9llqckOWp8qg)
Content-type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary=bR5ancgWdL55rtKmNnmikapX6p5oX1k8N

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--bR5ancgWdL55rtKmNnmikapX6p5oX1k8N
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="OcOqRoFIjTWScqUNc4V2ljFld3f0csvia";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: Zdenek Dohnal <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <50950267-3c73-5886-8ff4-ca245b7519c7-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [cups-devel] CUPS License Change Coming
References: <2E55FEEC-11BA-4789-B6F8-C6CCC27A8884-2kanFRK1NckAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
 <[email protected]>
 <BC8ED8CE-941C-4F90-94D3-045CCD2123D5-2kanFRK1NckAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
 <3aae6aa4-f4e5-c8f8-f1bf-dc3c3f718c87-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
 <FE4BA9E2-056A-44C5-9C8F-97D0D3F4580B-2kanFRK1NckAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <FE4BA9E2-056A-44C5-9C8F-97D0D3F4580B-2kanFRK1NckAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>

--OcOqRoFIjTWScqUNc4V2ljFld3f0csvia
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Language: en-US

On 11/08/2017 08:58 PM, Michael Sweet wrote:
> Zdenek,
>
>> On Nov 8, 2017, at 11:11 AM, Zdenek Dohnal <[email protected]> wrote:=

>> ...
>> would you mind considering dual license - Apache License 2.0 and GPLv2=
+?
>> Because "OS-supplied library" definition is relative and it could end =
up
>> that any widely used library can be exception (not mention widely used=

>> libraries differs across distributions - so library would be count as
>> "OS-supplied library" on one distro and not on a other) - and that wil=
l
>> lead into nullifying existing licensing rules.
>
> IANAL and am not comfortable getting into a legal debate about what con=
stitutes an OS-supplied library or whether GPL2-only software can "legall=
y" link against libcups.  But as an example, CUPS had to deal with this w=
hen linking against OpenSSL in the past by adding an exception to the lic=
ense file saying "it is OK to link CUPS against OpenSSL"...  I don't see =
why that approach would not work for any GPLv2-only project, if there was=
 any question about CUPS being a standard OS library after almost 20 year=
s of use...
>
> Anyways, I can certainly forward your dual-licensing request to the app=
ropriate people at Apple, but I'm sure they will want to know which proje=
cts/applications you think will be unable to continue using CUPS, and why=
=2E
>
> Thanks!
Thank you, Mike. I'll gather the input (we are discussing this issue on
Fedora developers list) and as IANAL I'll wait for Fedora legal guys
opinion on this issue (Solomon has started discussion already). Then
I'll send it to you.
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer
>
> _______________________________________________
> cups-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.cups.org/mailman/listinfo/cups-devel

--=20
Zdenek Dohnal
Associate Software Engineer
Red Hat Czech - Brno TPB-C



--OcOqRoFIjTWScqUNc4V2ljFld3f0csvia--

--bR5ancgWdL55rtKmNnmikapX6p5oX1k8N--

--Boundary_(ID_NBqAK25oxm9llqckOWp8qg)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
cups-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cups.org/mailman/listinfo/cups-devel

--Boundary_(ID_NBqAK25oxm9llqckOWp8qg)--