I object to this. And it did not say WILL be royalty-free it said INTEND and there is a special mention for those who might write security-base products.There is the one I don't believe. By their statement it did not say that developers using the software would have to obtain a seperate license that they "INTEND" to be free, then on the next line it kind of contradicted that. IANAL but I see this as WAY more threatening than LGPL section 6. . So I would expect the board to treat this as needing to be crystal clear.
Certainly, but I still don't know what you're reading into this. Let me try this one more time. The rule as it's currently going to be defined will be:
Anybody downloading the code will have to obtain a royalty-free license from RSA to use it, separate from whatever other license
applies (i.e. the ASL). Period. Unless the ASF talks them into changing their mind, that's the story. No ambiguity intended.
Will it be royalty-free forever and ever? No idea. But whatever you're reading into the statement they posted, I can clearlyI object to that as well.
communicate that the above is exactly what we've been told in plain English.
If that's a deal-breaker for the board, then I'm simply suggesting that that be made clear so that the principals can either dropI would like to petition the board for such a statement.
the proposal or tell RSA that it's a problem. The latter has been done informally, but obviously there's a stronger case to be made
to them if we can say "change it or the standard isn't going to be accepted".
This is not clear to me.
Unlike RSA's intent, the above is not clear to me. I have no idea whether a requirement to fax RSA a signed document constitutes a
"hindrance". If what you mean is that there are no other terms in play other than the ASL, then this is asked and answered, I think.
Right now, the answer is no, the ASL is only the code license. Right to use a SAML library (as opposed to a product) requires direct
permission from RSA at no cost.
-Andy
I do not think my concerns are petty and irrelevant as you seem to.
I'd ask that you please don't put words in my mouth. Your concerns are unclear to me. If they were petty and irrelevant, I wouldn't be wasting my precious time responding to them.
-- Scott
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
