Forwarded as an interesting and useful bit of info about Real Networks moves toward open source. OOnce again, we see that not all open source licensing is equal or attractive, even. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Serge Wroclawski <serge@xxxxxxx> On Fri, 26 Jul 2002, Peter Watkins wrote: > It's server and client code. See http://www.helixcommunity.org/ for info. > > Sounds like they plan to dual-license the code; one license is hoped to pass > muster with the OpenSource.org folks, the other is more like Sun's "community" > license (see http://www.helixcommunity.org/content/licenses.html). > > The libre/open license draft is available here: > http://www.helixcommunity.org/content/rpsl.html > > Presumably they'll modify that to some extent to appease opensource.org. They'd better- there's a lot in there that raises red flags for me: " 2.1 You may use, reproduce, display, perform, modify and distribute Original Code, with or without Modifications, solely for Your internal research and development and/or Personal Use, provided that in each instance: " In other words- you can't modify or distribute it commercially. They shouldn't be telling us who can distribute and who can't. 3b " (b) You hereby grant to RealNetworks and its subsidiaries a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual and irrevocable license, under Your Applicable Patent Rights and other intellectual property rights (other than patent) owned or controlled by You, to use, reproduce, display, perform, modify or have modified (for RealNetworks and/or its subsidiaries), sublicense and distribute Your Modifications, in any form, through multiple tiers of distribution. " I believe this is saying, "We can take your work and relicense it under a proprietary license." This is not acceptable. 12c "(c) automatically without notice from RealNetworks if You, at any time during the term of this License, commence an action for patent infringement against RealNetworks (including by cross-claim or counter claim in a lawsuit);" If you sue us (for anything), you can't use this code. If your lawsuit, for instance is about thier violation of the license, this could be nasty. Even if this is Open Source- I'd have a hard time believeing it will meet the criteria for Free Software. I can see a few uses of the client/server code, such as being able to "capture" Real Streams and either timeshift them (by storing them) or spaceshifting them when you do, and possibly formatshifting for use on another device, such as an mp3 player. Here's an example of a legitimate, fair use of the program (licenses aside for now) You want to hear Przemek on Kojo's show. You know today that you'll be going to the doctor and spend a lot of time in the waiting room. So you download the show in Real Format, turn it into an mp3, and put it on your mp3 player so you can listen later. This call can be done now, actually, but requires a lot more arm waiving. > "Almost every part of our system is available for licensing. Some parts of > the system, such as the RealAudio and RealVideo codecs, require commercial > licenses that are different than community licensing. We are streamlining > the licensing of our codecs to spread their ubiquity. Also, the Media > Commerce Suite, the Broadcast Management System (BMS) and the subscription > system leveraged by RealOne SuperPass are not part of our community source > or open source initiatives at this time." That's essentially saying it's not available. I see not practical difference between a community licensed code and a non-licensed code. Anyone who chooses to "join thier community" has to sign a contract saying that you promise not to tell anyone what you've learned. Such agreements are dangerous as well as immoral and I suggest no one sign them. - Serge Wroclawski _______________________________________________ ma-linux mailing list ma-linux at tux.org http://www.tux.org/mailman/listinfo/ma-linux
