Installshield 6 (inter-proc) patches

[Francois Gouget]

On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, J.Brown (Ender/Amigo) wrote:

> >    Permission is hereby granted ... to ... sublicense ...
> 
> Actually:
> 
> "sublicense:
> 		A license giving rights of production or marketing of
> products or services to a person or company that is not the primary
> holder of such rights."
> 
> That doesn't actually mean, in the context of the BSD license, they could
> legally change the license from that given by the primary copyright holder.
> It only means they are given the right to attach a EULA, or suplementary
> license, to the product.


   Thanks for the correction. It is interesting and gave me an idea for
modifying the current license. So I'm just throwing it out there for
what it's worth:

[...]
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
copy of this software and associated documentation files (the
"Software"), to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute,
sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to
whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following
conditions:
[...]


   Or, in traditional unified diff form :-) :

 Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
 copy of this software and associated documentation files (the
-"Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including
-without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish,
+"Software"), to use, copy, modify, merge, publish,
 distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to
 permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to
 the following conditions:


Pros:
1. AFAIU, it makes it impossible to change the Wine license to something
   else (e.g. the AFPL since this is what started it)
2. it should be equivalent to the current license in all other
   respects:
   - companies can still make proprietary derivatives to port their
     applications or differenciate themselves
   - no 'viral' wording or linking issues that could frighten companies
3. intermediate between the original X11 and the LGPL

Cons:
1. it's a non-standard license. As such it needs to be reviewed in
   detail and submitted to the OSI to make sure it is 'open-source'
   compliant.
2. it may be possible to publish the source and still restrict what
   users can do with it via a EULA. I'm not entirely sure about that
   so it should be investigated.
3. it makes it hard to change the Wine license (yeah, it's both a pro
   and a con, see pro 1).
4. it does not prevent the fragmentation of Wine into multiple
   proprietary variants (yes, this too is both good and bad, see pro 2.1)


--
Francois Gouget         fgouget at free.fr        http://fgouget.free.fr/
                           La terre est une bêta...