Re: [gentoo-dev] Panda 3D licensing issues

Re: [gentoo-dev] Panda 3D licensing issues

[Joshua Baergen]

On 6/18/05, Chris White <chriswhite@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I was given a user submitted ebuild request for the package panda3d.  However, upon reading the licesnse is it seems that it's one of those "sacrifice your newborn child and kill kittens" type licenses.  Someone mind going over it and verifying I'm not totally lost there:
> 
> http://panda3d.org/manual.php?page=license
> 
> Thanks,
> Chris White
> 
> 
> 
Ya, paragraph #4 is interesting, notably:

"An electronic copy of the source code for all modifications
made to the Software are to be forwarded to Licensor at
panda3d-owner@yahoogroups.com within 90 days of the date of the
modifications."

I didn't notice anything in the license that says they'll reject
changes.  I bet they just want to benefit from the open-source
community without looking around themselves.

-- 
Joshua Baergen

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Panda 3D licensing issues

[Ferris McCormick]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Sat, 18 Jun 2005, Chris White wrote:

> I was given a user submitted ebuild request for the package panda3d.
> However, upon reading the licesnse is it seems that it's one of those 
> "sacrifice your newborn child and kill kittens" type licenses.
> Someone mind going over it and verifying I'm not totally lost there:
>
> http://panda3d.org/manual.php?page=license
>
> Thanks,
> Chris White
>
I suppose it's paragraph 4 you object to?  It seems to say that if a user 
makes changes to Panda and then distributes Panda with these changes, then 
(1) the changes must be identified as the user's, not as Panda's, (2) the 
user must send these changes to Panda.

For Gentoo, I suppose that means that if Gentoo has to make changes to the 
software in order to support it, then Gentoo must identify them as Gentoo 
changes and send them to Panda.  In Gentoo's case, this seems mostly to 
mean that Panda must be told what Gentoo has to do to support Panda.

Or am I missing something?
Regards,
Ferris


- --
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@gentoo.org>
Developer, Gentoo Linux (sparc)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCs2uPQa6M3+I///cRAiXNAJ44wlYgPlCwIwMqpbZ4fdZuTLvA6wCgp1wr
joKukJG7XpnHSjDYpVTs6V4=
=8lBI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Panda 3D licensing issues

[Chris White]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 344 bytes --]

I was given a user submitted ebuild request for the package panda3d.  However, upon reading the licesnse is it seems that it's one of those "sacrifice your newborn child and kill kittens" type licenses.  Someone mind going over it and verifying I'm not totally lost there:

http://panda3d.org/manual.php?page=license

Thanks,
Chris White

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 200 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Panda 3D licensing issues

[Chris Bainbridge]

On 17/06/05, Joshua Baergen <joshuabaergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> "An electronic copy of the source code for all modifications
> made to the Software are to be forwarded to Licensor at
> panda3d-owner@yahoogroups.com within 90 days of the date of the
> modifications."
> 
> I didn't notice anything in the license that says they'll reject
> changes.  I bet they just want to benefit from the open-source
> community without looking around themselves.

Yup. One of the GPL avoidance techniques I've seen is to distribute
software to a customer whilst making it clear that if they ask for the
source they will lose support and updates. The idea of enforcing
redistribution in stronger terms than the GPL isn't new - the Affero
GPL uses similar terms to extend the GPL for network services.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list