It happens. AFAIK *we* don't have to send the ninja assassins to your house though...
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
AMD R600 LLVM Back-End Called For Inclusion
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by DaemonFC View PostWell, I hope that anyone interested in distributing your software gets you to fix the license or just deletes that entire section of code. It's bad enough that Mesa is accepting non-free, non-open code like MLAA already.Test signature
Comment
-
Originally posted by DaemonFC View PostThen you shouldn't have a problem with removing the parts that give you the right to "send ninja assassins to my house."Test signature
Comment
-
This is exactly the kind of crap that makes its way into licenses that claim to be open source and makes them not open source.
If I want to use the software to make nuclear bombs to drop on Australia, then a prohibition on making nuclear bombs to drop on Australia would be outside the scope of an open source license. (Of course it would still be illegal, but you don't get to tell me not to do it with a copyright license then claim that license is free and open)
Comment
-
Originally posted by DaemonFC View Post// If you use the software (in whole or in part), you shall adhere to all
// applicable U.S., European, and other export laws, including but not limited
// to the U.S. Export Administration Regulations
You could change it to say "We urge US, European, and other citizens to check their local export laws before distributing this software." and be in compliance with that section. As it is, you are most certainly not.
Edit: This also bounds me, an American, to European law, and if I don't obey law I'm not bound by, I violate AMD's nasty license. As well as "other" laws, so I have to comply with every export law in the world now? What happens if I have to violate Russian export control laws to satisy Uzbekistan's? Even though I'm an American?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ansla View Postforcing an user to obey all laws in existance anywhere in world is just dumb and in many cases not possible as different laws in different countries contradict each other.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DaemonFC View PostWell, I hope that anyone interested in distributing your software gets you to fix the license or just deletes that entire section of code. It's bad enough that Mesa is accepting non-free, non-open code like MLAA already.
Comment
-
Q, have you actually read the US export control laws (the BIS regs) or are you just saying "what would be nice if it were true" ?
Export control laws are probably the most complex and contradictary legislation around, and right now they appear to be getting worse. They are inconsistent and incompatible between countries, but that doesn't make them any less "the law", and acknowledging them in a license agreement doesn't make them any more restrictive.
Anyways, now that we know which project the code should end up in it may make sense to change the license. I've already said a few times that we went with the standard license to get the code out in public more quickly, but it doesn't seem to be registering so I'll say it one more time.Last edited by bridgman; 27 March 2012, 09:15 AM.Test signature
Comment
Comment