> Von: Andrew Thule <thules...@gmail.com> > It may be the case that the ISV foundations license to Crosswire is not as > restritive as Peter and Chris claimed and my action of sharing a compile > module on a separate server didn't in fact breach anything. Only by > inspecting Crosswire's license obligations can this be determined though.
Now, imagine the ISV license to CrossWire did indeed say "You can obtain a random 'updated' text from somewhere else and publish it too, including other parts of the Bible than those we supplied you with. Any of the subscribers of your mailing list may do the same" And we forgot to share that info.... Oh, ouch! So when Random Dude publishes a module made up from random additional bits and publishes it on a random server under the name of ISV all kinds of people jumped down his throat and told him that he had no licence to do so and he might end up in trouble because he does something which is against the law, he might have had a defense but it was not accessible to him in that we did not publish along with our module the sentence: "You can obtain a random 'updated' text from somewhere else and publish it too, including other parts of the Bible than those we supplied you with. Any of the subscribers of your mailing list may do the same" " Oh, ouch! Now what exactly would Random Dude's best approach be? Given that he thinks he might just have more permissions that the default legal stance, as he suspects that CrossWire nefariously does not share all permissions they have. He might have asked from CrossWire before he published a random text with random additions on a random server. CrossWire might have told him "Oh, ouch! "We have indeed more permissions, and we need to update our module DistributionLicense". Or CrossWire might have told him - likely - "No, our license text is as it stands in the conf file". He might have asked from ISV. ISV might have told him "Go, do as you like". Or ISV might have told him - "No, we do not want you to publish a random text on a random server". Or ISV might have told him - "Here is a better text, use this one, and please add following license text to it" Oh, ouch! So, we have established Random Dude could have saved himself a lot of trouble by asking before he did something which on the face of it looked like A Bad Idea. But Random Dude did not ask before Now, as it stands, Random Dude feels aggrieved as he did something which looks like it was A Bad Idea. In his heart of hearts he feels it was a A Good Idea nevertheless, only all kinds of people tell him it was not. What pray, may Random Dude do now? He can take his random module from his random server and check again, does he have more rights than the law permits him as default? Maybe. Maybe not. CrossWire, assures him that he has not as far as they are concerned. So, what is left? He can go and ask ISV. Dear ISV, I have obtained from a random place a random document which looks pretty similar to your text. In fact it looks a lot better than what CrossWire has on its server. May I please pass it on via my server as something which looks like a CrossWire module? Or, alternatively could you even give me a better text than my random document? Love, hugs and kisses Random Dude It might work. Or it might not. Nevertheless. Bible publishers (unless they are of the more evil kind) do not behave music publishers and chances are Random Dude's actions, however ill advised they might have been, will not end up in court. So, not all is lost, Random Dude has learned that asking prior to doing things which on the face of it look like A Bad Thing, is always A Good Idea. Or maybe he has not learned and continues to blame everyone but himself. To be continued... _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
