Re: APSL 1.1

From: Ben Pfaff <pfaffben(at)pilot(dot)msu(dot)edu>
To: Chip Salzenberg <chip(at)perlsupport(dot)com>
Cc: Ben Pfaff <pfaffben(at)pilot(dot)msu(dot)edu>, John Hasler <john(at)dhh(dot)gt(dot)org>, debian-legal(at)lists(dot)debian(dot)org, spi-general(at)lists(dot)debian(dot)org
Subject: Re: APSL 1.1
Date: 1999-04-20 18:28:05
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: spi-general

Chip Salzenberg <chip(at)perlsupport(dot)com> writes:

According to Ben Pfaff:
> Maybe you think that the last clause in that paragraph, ``If Apple
> suspends Your rights... nothing in this License shall be construed to
> restrict You... from replacing the Affected Original Code...'', means
> that you have some additional rights.

No, I don't think that. But it clarifies Apple's intent not to get in
your way if you make independent arrangements (the part you didn't
quote). This is better than simply saying nothing.


> [0] There is no distinction between bogus claims and
> reasonable claims.
> [2] There is no guarantee that a court will ever be involved
> or that it will make a judgment.
> [3] There is no guarantee that Apple will ever lift the
> suspension.

This pretty much matches the real world. Again, all Apple is doing
here is spelling out what would otherwise have to be fought over, at
great expense of time, money, and PR.

No. Apple is taking the law into their own hands through 9.1. They
are saying that they are better qualified to judge claims than the
courts. Courts should be able to say ``you can't use that code
anymore.'' The use of courts guarantees due process; Apple is not
giving us any such guarantee here. They can be entirely arbitrary.

If you don't like it, take it up with Congress and the USPTO. I'm
entirely serious in this. I'm not dismissing you. I'm pointing to
the real culprits that have made this clause of the APSL *necessary*.

> > Are you a lawyer?
> No. Are you willing to trust lawyers? I'm not.

Mistrusting everyone who's passed a bar exam is silly. Individuals
and pseudo-individuals like corportations should be trusted in varying
degrees according to their individual characters.

I'm willing to trust the current people in charge at Apple, to some
extent. I'm not willing to give any trust to the people in charge
there a year from now or 10 years from now. A license like this
doesn't give us any protection from them.

I won't use ``free'' software that can be arbitrarily revoked by a
corporation, and I hope that no one else will, either.
"Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these."
--Ovid (43 BC-18 AD)


Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Raul Miller 1999-04-20 18:55:04 Re: APSL 1.1
Previous Message Ben Pfaff 1999-04-20 17:55:59 Re: APSL 1.1