Re: Where is the qmail Licence?

>  If you want legal clarification, see a lawyer
The point is we have done that. What you refuse to accept is what the
lawyers say. 

1) There is no transfer of ownership or licence implied or given in the
qmail distribution.
2) The right to distribute does not equal the right to own or use.
3) _If_ (and only if) DJB's interpretation of US law is correct (in
softwarelaw.html) then:

a) It only applies to 'owned' copies or copies that were 'legally
obtained', but, because of (2), neither of these statements applies to
qmail. 

and b) even more importantly, it's a US law, which (surprise, surprise),
doesn't apply in any other country. (No, that little bit at the bottom
about the European Software Directive _isn't_ the same thing as the US
law, and if it was would only apply in Europe.)

The best case you can argue from djb's statements is that *perhaps* USA
and European downloader have some rights. Even if we are completely
generous and say that djb's statements and the law absolutely give USA
and European users the rights that some of you claim, the fact is that
the rest of the world is unlicensed.

This isn't a pissing contest. It's about the harm being done to qmail by
people who think that djb's lack of clarification on licensing is
somehow clever. Please note, I am not saying he hasn't got the right to
licence his software the way he wants, I am saying that the way many
people here *think* the software is licenced, is in fact not the way it
is licenced. 

If he were to make a simple set of statements in the qmail distro that
said something like this then I would be happy:
1) In order to own an approved copy of this software you must download
it from an approved distro
2) All downloaders of an approved distros have the right to use (and
patch) the software as they like, forever.
3) You may create an approved distro for others to copy only by making
an *exact* copy of an approved distro. You may not create any other
(including patched) distros without my written permission.

Are there any of you who think this isn't what you've already got? So
why shouldn't you give it to others as well.

It is obvious from some IP addresses on posts to this board that people
outside of the US & Europe are using qmail. Since they have no rights to
do so, why do you not take a more active role in shutting them down,
since you feel that djb's position is so reasonable? 

-- Andy

Charlie Brady wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2003, Hendrik Visage wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 09:31:43AM +0100, Andy Jackman wrote:
> > > I find you post offensive.
> >
> > I've found Charlie's views to be about the views of Bernstein himself :(
> 
> It's true that neither of us enjoys time wasting.
> 
> Charles and Russell have generously explained the current situation, which
> will only change (maybe) if someone is sued. Any further discussion is a
> waste of all our time. If you don't like the qmail license, use postfix.
> If you want legal clarification, see a lawyer. If you don't like Dan's
> behaviour, there's nothing we can do about it.
> 
> --
> Charlie