On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Richard Fontana
On 09/27/2012 02:47 AM, Kuno Woudt wrote:
> A license which is currently "missing" on that spectrum is a copyleft
> license compatible with the current popular app stores.
> The microsoft and apple app stores are fairly hostile toward free
> software developers, but they do have a considerable market share. So I
> think there are free software developers who would be interested in a
> license which achieves the aims of copyleft insofar that is allowed by
> the common app store agreements.
> Has anyone given this any thought?
I haven't thought about it (until now) in connection with
copyleft-next, but this is a good suggestion to consider. The problem
seems analogous to the problem that the old GPL system library
exception was trying to solve (or clarify).
For what it is worth, I don't think that this should be something
"along the spectrum" of licenses; it should be possible even with
strong copyleft licenses, assuming a "neutral" app store (i.e., one
that does not impose additional technical or legal restrictions). But
I also think copyleft.next takes care of this as already drafted.
e.g., as far as I know, most app stores would:
* comply with the first two points Sec. 4 of copyleft.next (which
really should be (a) and (b) for ease of reference, Richard, not
* comply with Sec. 5 (the only arguable derived work the store is
distributing is the binary; they're not otherwise modifying the work,
so this should present no obstacle for the stores)
* comply with Sec. 6 (note that this really isn't something you can
"comply" with; it's not really a condition so I think perhaps the
reference to it in the third bullet of Sec. 4 is incorrect?)
* comply with Sec. 8(b), presuming that the person who uploads to the
app store ensures that "clear directions" are present and that
distribution from a web location is considered a "reasonably
equivalent manner" to an app store (which IMHO it should be).
Sec. 7 is the tricky one. As long as some requirement of that sort is
maintained (which I think it must be, or else you open a gaping
loophole in the license) then each app store has to be evaluated
separately with regards to both their legal and technical policies, to
see if they introduce further restrictions. But that's a concern for
particular app stores, not the concept of app stores generally.