[consult] Call for Community Consultation - Software Repository
michael.dillon at bt.com
michael.dillon at bt.com
Thu Jan 17 15:17:19 EST 2008
- Previous message: [consult] Call for Community Consultation - Software Repository
- Next message: [consult] Call for Community Consultation - Software Repository
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> > ARIN should be neutral as to license or indeed whether there is any > > license at all. ... > > Concur. ARIN should be liberal in what it accepts. Just how does liberal ARIN distribute commercial software on its server without running afoul of the law? Sell it, I suppose. Or maybe sign some kind of distribution agreement. Do we really want to go there? That leaves open-source and public domain. The Open Source Initiative has done all the heavy lifting on figuring out which licenses are Open Source and which are not. If ARIN takes the trouble to make sure that each so-called "open source" package is actually using a license approved by OSI, that makes the repository more useful. Most of the potential users of such software work in companies whose legal staff are interested in making sure that employees only use software which they are properly licenced to use. OSI approved licences fit the bill for internal use, and for incorporating into products, the GPL versions are OK too as long as the employees understand that there are obligations under those licenses. And then we come to public domain software. This is a legal term which refers to software with no copyright, but in order to have this status there needs to be a specific disclaimer of copyright. I think that ARIN should steer clear of distributing any commercial software, not even shareware. It would be OK to keep a registry of such software that points to other sites which distribute it, but that is all. I think that, in addition to checking for OSI-approved licenses and posting diffs on Open Source software, ARIN should also check for a copyright disclaimer on any so-called public domain software. If any package falls through the cracks and does not have an approved OSI license or copyright disclaimer, then it should not be distributed, only listed in the registry of packages. Most importantly, is that ARIN has to add some value, not just be an open FTP site. --Michael Dillon
- Previous message: [consult] Call for Community Consultation - Software Repository
- Next message: [consult] Call for Community Consultation - Software Repository
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the ARIN-consult mailing list