On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 01:12:01PM -0700, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
The issue here is whether it is possible to add Sender-ID technology
to a GPL licensed mailer and distribute the technology with the
mailer itself.
Let us for the sake of argument stipulate that there is a conflict,
that it is not possible to distribute the technology itself under
the GPL. My point is that the GPL does not prevent the distribution
of Sender-ID technology for GPL licensed mailers.
I don't see how this solves the problem. The problem is that the license
appears to prohibit source code redistribution. This would affect all FOSS
products equally.
Yes, you can make a Sender-ID implementation available, but you can only
distribute it directly to end users. It doesn't seem to matter what license
you put on it, so I don't see why the emphasis here is on the GPL. Much of the
value of open source is the multitude of distributions, mirrors and sites like
Sourceforge that distribute the code to users.
So, while it is perfectly possible to do so, I believe this will unreasonably
inhibit adoption of the standard. Sender-ID will likely not appear in open
source OS distributions. Sender-ID will likely not appear in standard
distributions of MTA's and MUA's, Webmail systems, etc. Even the Sendmail
statement said they'd have to make it available as a separate download. Sure,
people who really want it might be able to get it, but that isn't going to
result in widespread adoption. Without MTA adoption, the incentive to publish
is low.
I suggest, therefore, that with the current license requirements, that this
standard be rejected and a non-encumbered alternative be considered.
--
"You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other
man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free." -- Clarence Darrow