FS/OSS license: not quite enough of a requirement

[Alexandre Oliva]

On May 10, 2007, Rex Dieter <rdieter at math.unl.edu> wrote:

> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> And today I realized that's not quite enough to ensure that the *user*
>> receives the source code from us.  All that states is that *we* get
>> the source code.
>> 
>> So we could in theory accept Free Software, including source code,
>> under a liberal license, build it AFAICT in perfect accordance with
>> our guidelines, and distribute only its binaries to our users.

> huh? , it's right in the *definition* of opensource (see item 2):
> http://opensource.org/docs/osd

Yeah, and it's in the definition of Free Software.  And if *we* can
enjoy the freedoms, it's Free Software for us.  And if software
complies with all the criteria set forth in the OSD, then it's OSS for
us.

But where do we state that it's going to remain so for our users?

Where do we state that we're not going to deny them the freedoms, or
offer them software that was OSS for us but that isn't for them, or
that we're not going to collute with third parties to make it seem
like we're respecting our users' freedoms, while we procure the
restraining of freedoms to these third parties?

I.e., where do we state that, when we distribute software, it's FS
(and OSS) for both ourselves *and* those who receive it from us.

My point, all the way from the beginning of this thread, is that its
being FS (and OSS) for ourselves is not enough.


> Now, If it would make you feel better that we spell it out
> *explicitly*, then draft a proposal for review:

Here's an early draft of what I have in mind.  I understand it's not
compatible with current practice, but I'm having hard enough a time
just phrasing the kind of commitment I think we ought to pursue.

Any comments?


Fedora's (proposed) Public Promise

The Fedora Project is publicly committed to respecting its users' four
freedoms.  Fedora promises to only distribute software under Free
Software royalty-free licenses, always offering source code for the
software itself and any other software needed to build it and run it.

While Fedora unfortunately cannot guarantee that all the software it
distributes is free from patent royalties or other legal weapons
incompatible with the four freedoms, avoiding them is a goal that
Fedora strives for.  Fedora promises to never distribute software
under patent licenses or other agreements that would not permit
downstream recipients to enjoy the four freedoms.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member         http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}