Topic: License concerns with SME 5.6

[Perry Michalski]

I was looking through the RPM listings and found a couple inconsistencies that concern me regarding the licensing.

One that stuck out is the following when I did a:
rpm -qil e-smith-proxypass | more

The License is: e-smith, inc.

It doesn't say anything about GPL, freeware, etc.  What is the e-smith, inc. license about?  Why doesn't it say GPL?

Does this mean that that module is NOT GPL?  Darrell May also has a contrib called dmc-mitel-proxypass?

Is there a good reason for this?

I understand that there are many licenses... I have reviewed most of them and they all share the "GPL" idea of copying, modifying, etc., but I don't know what the Mitel Corporation and e-smith, inc. licenses allow me to do.

BTW, do a:
rpm -qia | egrep '(Name|License)' | more

to view the Name/Licenses.


Others Licenses to note:

e-smith-apache-proxy --> e-smith, inc.
SMEServer --> Mitel Network Corporation
e-smith-release --> Mitel Networks Corporation
tai64nunix --> Peter Samuel - based on code by Dan Bernstein
e-smith-proxypass --> e-smith, inc.

[Paul]

e-smith allows you to customize to your hearts content.  You can create modules, custom-templates, add applications, whatever.  You may package your contribution as an RPM.  You can not however modify and re-package e-smith's base code.  Read the bottom of this page titled "Packaging Your Customization".  It explains everything.

http://www.e-smith.org/custom/

Actually, read the whole page.  It explains a lot about e-smith customization.

Good Luck
Paul

[Perry Michalski]

Thanks Paul,

Any code that is GPL, GPL2, freeware, etc. can be modified, so you are not correct.  That was not the information that I was looking for.

Yes, you should be able to modify and re-package e-smith's base code (98% of it is GPL).

It's just a couple packages that are not specified as GPL that concerns me.

[Paul]

I think you misunderstood me.  When I refer to e-smith "base" code I mean anything spacifically developed and written exclusivly by e-smith/SME/Mitel (or whatever you want to call them).  From here on I will cal this "e-smith code".  As you indicate above this would be a total of maybe 2% of the entire e-smith server distro.  The rest has all been used/modified under GPL, etc., therefore must still remain GPL, etc.

Some if not all of the parts of the e-smith distro that were developed/'written by e-smith are NOT GPL.  These parts as stated in the link in my previous post are copywrited by e-smith and should not be altered.  This accounts for a very small portion of the total distro (4 or 5 packages I think) and mainly have to do with the setup, templates and server manager.  You can develop and distribute custom-templates and improve/add on to the server manager in the way of seperate RPM's or How-To's but you should not modify any copywrited "e-smith code" and re-distribute a modified "e-smith code" as a new package.

In theory, when you create a custom template, you override the base setup without altering the "e-smith code".  This allows you to customize the system without the possible breaking of copywrite laws.

All of the add on RPM's and How-To's that are available for e-smith should follow this criteria.

Proxy and Proxypass is NOT GPL to begin with.  They are copywrited by Apache and different rules apply.  E-smith has probably modified their code and changed the name and license with permission from Apache.

This whole licensing issue is complicated but it is all summed up in Mitel's license agreement.  The licensing agreement is different for the "Free" version and can be found on your server.

Try: http://yourdomainname.com/server-manager.  The last option is the support and license agreements.

The part you must be concerned with reads as follows:

"Most components of this software give you the right to copy
and distribute this software under the terms of the GNU
General Public License, as published by the Free Software
Foundation. The text of this license is included below. The
other components of this software have different licenses
which also permit copying and redistribution."

<>


The bottom line is that anything written exclusively by e-smith is copywrited by e-smith and is NOT GPL but they give you the right to copy and re-distribute but you can not alter the "e-smith code".  Anything that was originally copywrited/licensed by someone else remains that way exept it seems proxy and proxypass for some reason (I'm sure e-smith has permission and a good reason for this).  Anything used by e-smith that was originally GPL, etc. remains GPL, etc.

If you have ideas for development that require altering the e-smith code then e-smith is open to any sugestions.  They test any changes to their code before releasing it.  They want to control the quality of their software but still allow free distribution.

Why does this concern you?  Do you need to modify any of the e-smith code?

I hope this answers at least some of your questions.

Paul

[Paul]

I think I found a possible reason for proxy and proxypass name changes.  It probably has to do with the license agreement with Apache.  It states the following:

* 4. The names "Apache" and "Apache Software Foundation" must
 *    not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this
 *    software without prior written permission. For written
 *    permission, please contact apache@apache.org.
 *
 * 5. Products derived from this software may not be called "Apache",
 *    nor may "Apache" appear in their name, without prior written
 *    permission of the Apache Software Foundation.

I looks like Apache is trying to distance themselves from any un-tested modified versions of their software and who would blame them.

[Perry Michalski]

Paul wrote:
>
> I think you misunderstood me.  When I refer to e-smith "base"
> code I mean anything spacifically developed and written
> exclusivly by e-smith/SME/Mitel (or whatever you want to call
> them).  From here on I will cal this "e-smith code".  As you
> indicate above this would be a total of maybe 2% of the
> entire e-smith server distro.  The rest has all been
> used/modified under GPL, etc., therefore must still remain
> GPL, etc.

Anything exclusively written (and is proprietary) by Mitel would be the "blades".  As I understand it, this is proprietary code that is not GPL'ed.  But, the base code is GPL.  That means that it can be modified.  Of course the code must be made available (back to the original owner).  The modified code is also GPL and CAN NEVER be made proprietary, unless Mitel chooses to do so (which they have not done).

Do an "rpm -qil e-smith-base | more" and look at the license.  It's GPL.

See: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt

>
> Some if not all of the parts of the e-smith distro that were
> developed/'written by e-smith are NOT GPL.  

I disagree, Paul.  Most (90%) is GPL.  Look at the licenses in the RPM files.


>This accounts for a very
> small portion of the total distro (4 or 5 packages I think)
> and mainly have to do with the setup, templates and server
> manager.  You can develop and distribute custom-templates and
> improve/add on to the server manager in the way of seperate
> RPM's or How-To's but you should not modify any copywrited
> "e-smith code" and re-distribute a modified "e-smith code" as
> a new package.

If it is GPL, you can.  That's the nature of GPL.

>
> In theory, when you create a custom template, you override
> the base setup without altering the "e-smith code".  This
> allows you to customize the system without the possible
> breaking of copywrite laws.

copyright laws still appy, but the GPL licenses allow others to modify, improve, whatever the code and redistribute the new code.  But the source must be made available back to the community.

>
> All of the add on RPM's and How-To's that are available for
> e-smith should follow this criteria.
>
> Proxy and Proxypass is NOT GPL to begin with.  They are
> copywrited by Apache and different rules apply.  E-smith has
> probably modified their code and changed the name and license
> with permission from Apache.
>

Yes, that makes sense.  Apache has their own license.

> This whole licensing issue is complicated but it is all
> summed up in Mitel's license agreement.  The licensing
> agreement is different for the "Free" version and can be
> found on your server.

I have read the agreement.

>
> Try: http://yourdomainname.com/server-manager.  The last
> option is the support and license agreements.
>
> The part you must be concerned with reads as follows:
>
> "Most components of this software give you the right to copy
> and distribute this software under the terms of the GNU
> General Public License, as published by the Free Software
> Foundation. The text of this license is included below. The
> other components of this software have different licenses
> which also permit copying and redistribution."
>
> <>

Yes, I understand.  The other licenses being Apache, Qmail (Dan Berstein), BSD licenses, freeware licenses, e-smith, Mitel Corporation, etc.

>
>
> The bottom line is that anything written exclusively by
> e-smith is copywrited by e-smith and is NOT GPL but they give
> you the right to copy and re-distribute but you can not alter
> the "e-smith code".  Anything that was originally
> copywrited/licensed by someone else remains that way exept it
> seems proxy and proxypass for some reason (I'm sure e-smith
> has permission and a good reason for this).  Anything used by
> e-smith that was originally GPL, etc. remains GPL, etc.

Ok.  I think we are agreeing on the same point.  Anything written exclusively by e-smith/Mitel and is GPL follows the GNU GPL license agreement.  That agreement permits others to modify the code and redistribute.  However, you cannot use the Mitel/e-smith name (because that is copyright infringment).

Look at the (now-dead) axon linux distro.  
http://lwn.net/2001/0920/dists.php3

They modified their distribution according to the GPL license agreement.  They had to make their source code available.

>
> If you have ideas for development that require altering the
> e-smith code then e-smith is open to any sugestions.  They
> test any changes to their code before releasing it.  They
> want to control the quality of their software but still allow
> free distribution.

If they want to incorporate the work of others, they can do so simply because they have access to the source code.

> I hope this answers at least some of your questions.
>

Yes, I think they have, Paul.  Thanks for your replies.

[Perry Michalski]

http://www.e-smith.org/bboard//read.php?v=t&f=3&i=2509&t=2464

Does this still apply to the latest version (5.6)?


Thank you for asking. As you know, the GNU General Public License gives you the right to modify our software and distribute it, provided you make your modifications similarly available under the GPL.

However, the e-smith brand name, the e-smith logo and the term i-bay are protected. If someone modifies our software in any way, they are not allowed to associate our name with the new product without our permission. (We hope you understand that this is necessary to protect the value of our brand.)