[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

bdb license questions (was: Re: Subversion 1.1.0 Release Candidate 1 released.)

From: Peter Koellner <peter_at_asgalon.net>
Date: 2004-07-15 11:20:07 CEST

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:

> What does 'having a closed source project' have to do with 'needing a newer
> BDB'? And what does all that have to do with Subversion?

considering all this "intellectual property" madness that is happening
today, it is very important to make clear to possible users that no hidden
restrictions have to be feared, or people will not accept your work any
more.

when i have to install a new piece of hardware on a pc of a client company
and i have to open some cd envelope with a seal saying that "by opening the
seal i agree to the software license agreement of the enclosed software",
what am i supposed to do? ask someone if i am allowed to open that?

basically, i do not agree. never.

the company that bought that piece of hardware has no interest at all
in the way the manufacturer makes the devices services available to the
target pc, so there really is no second contract that has to be agreed on,
because the commercial transaction has already taken place and the device
has been paid for. if the manufacturer claims to have any rights after
receiving payment, only because a piece of code they produced exactly for
that purpose is needed to make it work, my natural reaction would be to
laugh in their face.

so naturally, i do not break the seal, but cut open the side of the envelope
to fetch the installation medium. and i NEVER read license agreements i am
forced to agree to when starting the setup program, a long time after money
was transferred. when i have paid for something, i have the natural right
to use it, regardless of any silly laws that might exist somewhere, so i
regard this "yes or no"-questioning as completely void and ignore the whole
thing. but i am fully aware what software manufacturers are trying to do to
me by bombarding me with those silly license agreement forms.

of course, things might be different for companies that want to defend
themselves from legal prosecution gambits by their competition or parasitic
software providers that wait until usage is settled before they begin their
harvest.

also, remember the GIF89a desaster, the rambus patents, and, if you happen
to live in germany, the "explorer" brand name legal exploit by von
Gravenreuth.

so: if the license model is not clear, managers will not like to switch
over from CVS. and that means that a few years have to pass by until the
next generation of computer science students got used to it at the
university. if universities are not starting to get frightened of
intellectual property enslavement too in the meantime...

-- 
peter koellner <peter@asgalon.net> 
phone: +49 30 44035450                               mobile: +49 172 3292977
icq# 161891755                 RL:  pptp://berlin.de:10437/hiddenseer_str/11
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jul 15 11:20:36 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.