[Axiom-legal] RE: Aldor and Axiom

[C Y]

--- Bill Page <address@hidden> wrote:

> > No, GPL won't quite work - Aldor.org requires complete rights
> > to derivative works, IIRC.
> 
> No where does it say that Aldor.org reserves *exclusive* rights.
> GPL guarantees these rights to everyone, so it certainly
> satisfies the original intent of at least the binary/library
> source license distributed by Aldor.org.

Hmm.  I guess that's true, so long as Aldor.org didn't want to ever
release a commercial binary only version using someone else's
derivative work.  My recollection was that they do have that right
under the Aldor license, but IANAL (as they say on slashdot).  And of
course it's unlikely they would exercise it in that fashion,
particularly given the current state of the Aldor project...
 
> The issue might eventually be who can incorporate Aldor into
> non-open source software. At present the Axiom BSD-style license
> allows this for Axiom itself but it is not clear to me whether
> this is also the intent of Aldor.org. Choosing GPL as an interim
> license would allow this to be decided at a later date.

I think Aldor.org has complete rights to any derivative work based off
of aldor, not just the right to open up the code.  GPL wouldn't work
there, since it would allow derivative work code to prevent its
inclusion in an commercial Aldor.org release w/o source code.  While
Aldor.org might not have intended things to have this meaning, if I'm
not mistaken thats the effect the license has, and GPL is definitely
incompatible with that.  A more informed opinion than mine would be
welcome here.
 
> I am also in favour of pushing the availability of Aldor as open
> source by "jumping the gun" (to use an Olympics-style analogy :)
> and releasing Aldor source now with the Axiom distribution.

Well, there is that of course, but I was mainly thinking that we could
get more "core" work done with both design decisions and coding if we
hedged our bet that Aldor will eventually be released.

> But I think we have to consider this strategy carefully - 
> particularly the licensing issues.

Unfortunately, I agree.  Yuck.

> Unfortunately this is unavoidable. That is
> why I would propose to choose a provisional open source license
> for the Aldor part of the distribution that would not preclude a
> more open license at a later date.

It makes sense, but if I'm reading that right the Aldor license just
doesn't permit it - maybe GPL + full rights to Aldor.org would work.

> Even then, there is a possibility
> that this strategy might irritate some people that we really do
> not want to irritate.

Definitely true.

> The question is: what is the greater risk for the Axiom project?

For the moment, I would say we make it easy to install against an
existing Aldor, provide good instructions how how to get it installed,
and leave it at that, I guess.  Anybody messing with Aldor at this
point will have the skillset to get it working from the instructions to
begin with.

Cheers,
CY

P.S.  I don't suppose we could try to decompile
(http://boomerang.sourceforge.net/,
http://www.backerstreet.com/rec/rec.htm) Aldor?  Does the license or
legal situation forbid that?  It wouldn't be pretty but at least it
would be source code.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com