Hi Seth, I just saw http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/apsl.html on slashdot and
read your point that the license says:
13.1 Export Law Assurances. You may not use or otherwise export or
re-export the Original Code except as authorized by United
States law and the laws of the jurisdiction in which the
Original Code was obtained. In particular, but without
limitation, the Original Code may not be exported or
re-exported (a) into (or to a national or resident of) any
U.S. embargoed country or (b) to anyone on the U.S. Treasury
Department's list of Specially Designated Nationals or the
U.S. Department of Commerce's Table of Denial Orders. By using
the Original Code, You represent and warrant that You are not
located in, under control of, or a national or resident of any
such country or on any such list.
And your note that:
-- but, since many persons and groups of persons cannot (truthfully)
do that, the APSL discriminates against all of them. Therefore, as I
see it, the APSL is not an Open Source license and the OSI should
reconsider its decision about the current version of the APSL, asking
Apple to fix this problem with its license.
I think you're quite right, this is another thing that makes the APSL
non-free. There's even precedent; IIRC packages have been kicked out of
debian in the past for having copyrights that explicitly said they couldn't
be used in embargoed countries.
Good spotting, and I'll be interested to hear what the rest of debian-legal
thinks about this and the rest of your analysis.
--
see shy jo
