www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - The D license

reply Andrew Marlow <marlow.andrew googlemail.com> writes:
I just downloaded and installed DMD for Windoze and had a look at the file
license.txt installed in C:\D. It contains some rather worrying text:

---
The Software is not generally available software. It has not undergone
testing and may contain errors. The Software was not designed to operate after
December 31, 1999. 
---

This is followed by the usual sort of disclaimer. But it is not a good opening.
And it closes with stuff that is even more worrying:

---
The Software is copyrighted and comes with a single user license,
and may not be redistributed. If you wish to obtain a redistribution license,
please contact Digital Mars.
---

The FAQ taks about D being open source and it looks like the source zip may be
downloaded (I haven't tried) but the warning above is a bit off-putting.
Normally open source can be freely distributed, but not D, it seems. And what
does the license entitle the user to do? It doesn't say. It doesn't even list
things that are prohibited.

Can the wording of this license be improved please? IMHO it should identify
more clearly what users can and can't do. And surely it is expected to work
after December 1999. It wouldn't hurt to assign the copyright more clearly
either rather than just say it is copyrighted but not who/what the copright
holder is, e.g.

Copyright (c) 2010 Digital Mars Ltd. All rights reserved.

Regards,

Andrew Marlow
Mar 10 2010
next sibling parent reply Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
Andrew Marlow wrote:


 The FAQ taks about D being open source and it looks like the source zip may be
downloaded (I haven't tried) but the warning above is a bit off-putting.
Normally open source can be freely distributed, but not D, it seems. And what
does the license entitle the user to do? It doesn't say. It doesn't even list
things that are prohibited.

What FAQ is this? It should be changed to 'source available,' unless it is refering to the front end or phobos. There is really nothing wrong with the opening of the license other than it being more direct than any other license.
Mar 10 2010
parent reply Michiel Helvensteijn <m.helvensteijn.remove gmail.com> writes:
Jesse Phillips wrote:

 There is really nothing wrong with the opening of the license other than
 it being more direct than any other license.

Yeah. "The Software was not designed to operate after December 31, 1999." That's not wrong. Hehe. I still find that part of the license so ridiculously funny. I'm actually thinking of writing a new software license myself: Do not use it in a box. Do not use it with a fox. Do not use it with a mouse. Do not use it in a house. Do not use it here or there. Do not use it anywhere. -- Michiel Helvensteijn
Mar 10 2010
next sibling parent div0 <div0 users.sourceforge.net> writes:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Michiel Helvensteijn wrote:
 Jesse Phillips wrote:
 
 There is really nothing wrong with the opening of the license other than
 it being more direct than any other license.

Yeah. "The Software was not designed to operate after December 31, 1999." That's not wrong. Hehe. I still find that part of the license so ridiculously funny. I'm actually thinking of writing a new software license myself: Do not use it in a box. Do not use it with a fox. Do not use it with a mouse. Do not use it in a house. Do not use it here or there. Do not use it anywhere.

Oh, I'm so using that. :) - -- My enormous talent is exceeded only by my outrageous laziness. http://www.ssTk.co.uk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iD8DBQFLl/aUT9LetA9XoXwRAme3AJ4yKYoCB3t2vb+3xuMcAD6RTuU+FwCgrrdt BELI/OXBrr1M4Ag2/wM0Qoo= =AzV2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Mar 10 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
Michiel Helvensteijn Wrote:

 Jesse Phillips wrote:
 
 There is really nothing wrong with the opening of the license other than
 it being more direct than any other license.

Yeah. "The Software was not designed to operate after December 31, 1999." That's not wrong.

It isn't wrong, just because it is after 2000 doesn't mean the software was designed to work in this millennium. Sure, the software has proven itself, but doesn't make the statement invalid.
Mar 10 2010
parent Michiel Helvensteijn <m.helvensteijn.remove gmail.com> writes:
Jesse Phillips wrote:

 There is really nothing wrong with the opening of the license other
 than it being more direct than any other license.

Yeah. "The Software was not designed to operate after December 31, 1999." That's not wrong.

It isn't wrong, just because it is after 2000 doesn't mean the software was designed to work in this millennium. Sure, the software has proven itself, but doesn't make the statement invalid.

The language and compiler are still now being worked on under this license, aren't they? Yet the statement is not invalid? Since we are now living "after December 31, 1999" (and we haven't invented time travel), that suggests to me that the software is not being designed to operate at all. That's, if not wrong, completely silly. -- Michiel Helvensteijn
Mar 10 2010
prev sibling parent reply Justin Johansson <no spam.com> writes:
Michiel Helvensteijn Wrote:

 Do not use it in a box.
 Do not use it with a fox.
 Do not use it with a mouse.
 Do not use it in a house.
 Do not use it here or there.
 Do not use it anywhere.

Your rhyme reminds me of words from the 1905 classic novel, The Scarlet Pimpernel, by Baroness Emma Orczy. "They seek him here, they seek him there, those Frenchies seek him everywhere. Is he in heaven or is he in hell? That damned elusive Pimpernel." It's handy to know this when playing Trivial Pursuit. The story line of The Scarlet Pimpernel actually became the template for a succession of Hollywood and comic-book heroes such as Zorro and Batman. Cheers, Justin Johansson
Mar 10 2010
parent reply "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:
"Justin Johansson" <no spam.com> wrote in message 
news:hn92uf$2g9c$1 digitalmars.com...
 Michiel Helvensteijn Wrote:

 Do not use it in a box.
 Do not use it with a fox.
 Do not use it with a mouse.
 Do not use it in a house.
 Do not use it here or there.
 Do not use it anywhere.

Your rhyme reminds me of words from the 1905 classic novel, The Scarlet Pimpernel, by Baroness Emma Orczy. "They seek him here, they seek him there, those Frenchies seek him everywhere. Is he in heaven or is he in hell? That damned elusive Pimpernel." It's handy to know this when playing Trivial Pursuit. The story line of The Scarlet Pimpernel actually became the template for a succession of Hollywood and comic-book heroes such as Zorro and Batman.

Michiel's rhyme is a reference to, and slight modification of, the children's book by Dr. Seuss "Green Eggs and Ham" (I had that as a kid). Although clearly Dr. Seuss must have been influenced by that Pimpernel. This is the first I've heard of that, though. Intresting history there.
Mar 10 2010
parent Michiel Helvensteijn <m.helvensteijn.remove gmail.com> writes:
Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Michiel's rhyme is a reference to, and slight modification of, the
 children's book by Dr. Seuss "Green Eggs and Ham" (I had that as a kid).

I didn't know it as a kid. But it is referenced so often in popular television series and such, I eventually had to look it up. It's a catchy rhyme. The Scarlet Pimpernel is often referenced too. He's mentioned in at least Black Adder the Third and The Simpsons (where he is pitted against Zorro). Who says people need literary education? We just need TV. ;-) -- Michiel Helvensteijn
Mar 10 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent Robert Clipsham <robert octarineparrot.com> writes:
On 10/03/10 14:41, Andrew Marlow wrote:
 I just downloaded and installed DMD for Windoze and had a look at the file
license.txt installed in C:\D. It contains some rather worrying text:

 ---
 The Software is not generally available software. It has not undergone
 testing and may contain errors. The Software was not designed to operate after
December 31, 1999.
 ---

I believe this is some sort of legacy from when Symantec owned the code, it can safely be ignored, I think it has to be left in for legal reasons though, I'm not completely sure... I agree that it needs to go if possible :)
 This is followed by the usual sort of disclaimer. But it is not a good
opening. And it closes with stuff that is even more worrying:

 ---
 The Software is copyrighted and comes with a single user license,
 and may not be redistributed. If you wish to obtain a redistribution license,
 please contact Digital Mars.
 ---

This is correct. The DMD Front End is dual licensed under the GNU GPL version 1 and the Artistic License (both included with the source). The source for the backend is available, but is a single user license, as seen in backendlicense.txt.
 The FAQ taks about D being open source and it looks like the source zip may be
downloaded (I haven't tried) but the warning above is a bit off-putting.
Normally open source can be freely distributed, but not D, it seems. And what
does the license entitle the user to do? It doesn't say. It doesn't even list
things that are prohibited.

The FAQ at http://digitalmars.com/d/2.0/faq.html#q5 says what I said above, it isn't extremely clear, but it does :)
 Can the wording of this license be improved please? IMHO it should identify
more clearly what users can and can't do. And surely it is expected to work
after December 1999. It wouldn't hurt to assign the copyright more clearly
either rather than just say it is copyrighted but not who/what the copright
holder is, e.g.

That'd be nice, I guess it's up to Symantec what Walter can do with it though... I'm guessing they're being more restrictive than they need to be, in the event that something bad does happen they don't wanna get sued over it :)
 Copyright (c) 2010 Digital Mars Ltd. All rights reserved.

 Regards,

 Andrew Marlow

Mar 10 2010
prev sibling parent Bane <branimir.milosavljevic gmail.com> writes:
Andrew Marlow Wrote:

 I just downloaded and installed DMD for Windoze and had a look at the file
license.txt installed in C:\D. It contains some rather worrying text:
 
 ---
 The Software is not generally available software. It has not undergone
 testing and may contain errors. The Software was not designed to operate after
December 31, 1999. 
 ---

I understand that this sort of disclaimer is used with 99.999% of all software. It says that if it breaks, it's not authors fault. If this directness is bad then there is always option to use programs accompanied with 10.000+ lawyer words EULA essays that say basically the same thing, but doesn't leave troublesome impression because nobody ever reads them :)
Mar 10 2010