FSFE Newsletter - February 2014

[Heiki "Repentinus" Ojasild]

On 03/10/2014 10:10 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Exactly. The only reason why Bacula is able to pull off the proprietary 
>> version is that parallel to the FLA assigning the right to FSFE, all the 
>> contributors also signed a CA to Kern.
> 
> Please point out where in the FSFE/Bacula Systems agreement the
> license grant under B(1) is restricted to Bacula code.
> 
>> The only reason why Bacula is able to pull off the proprietary
>> version is that parallel to the FLA assigning the right to FSFE, all
>> the contributors also signed a CA to Kern.
> 
> I expect that most "Beneficiaries" who have signed FLAs with FSFE
> would be rather surprised that "Bacula Systems S.A. respectively Kern
> Sibbald has the right to use, reproduce, modify, redistribute and make
> available software based on [their] contributions and resulting
> software 'under other licenses' including under a proprietary license
> as the Bacula Enterprise Version, in accordance with Section 3 (2) of
> the FLA.".

Section B 1. cannot be interpreted without regard to the surrounding
clauses. Section A and the preamble of Section B make it clear that the
agreement concerns the Bacula software.


-- 
Heiki "Repentinus" Ojasild
FSFE Fellowship Representative
mailto:repentinus at fsfe.org
xmpp:repentinus at jabber.fsfe.org
http://blogs.fsfe.org/repentinus/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 901 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20140310/c4813280/attachment.sig>