Re: propose: `cypherpunks license' (Re: Wanted: Twofish source code)

Eric Young (eay@cryptsoft.com)
Fri, 2 Oct 1998 00:42:22 +1000 (EST)

• Next message: Jim Gillogly: "VeriSign cert reader"
• Previous message: Perry E. Metzger: "Re: Cryptanalysis of SecurID (ACE/Server)"

On Wed, 30 Sep 1998, bram wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Oct 1998, Eric Young wrote:
> > I personally have a policy that if I ever change the licence conditions in any
> > of my code, the last version with the old licence will always be available for
> > those who don't like the new licence. This way if my opinions on how the
> > software can be used changes, people don't have to suffer through my
> > 'conversion to a new faith' :-). The will only have access to the old stuff
> > under the licence they like.
>
> Is there some way of making this legally binding? I mean, is there some
> legal procedure you could go through to gaurantee that a standing offer
> was available forever, aside from just your word?

Make the code free I suppose :-). Basically I think of published code as a
book. You could do a new updated version, but any allready in print, cannot
be recalled and changed. What if you find an old version, x.y.z and it has a
licence in it that says it is ok to do xyz with it. Are you breaking the law
because you are not aware of a newer version with a different licence?
To me this makes no sence, even if legal people think it does. I will have no
part of this retrospective licence changes. If you decided to build an
application based on it being under a partiuclar licence, then at some point
you are told the conditions have changed. That is crap. In the case of free
software where lots of people contribute. It is also not fair to change the
licence (assuming the package is all your IP) and incorperate contributions
made by people under the assumption that the next version will be under same
licence as the previous version. It is sort of like a charity changing to a
money making excersize, just after the TV campain, when the dontations start
flowing in, but before the cheuques arive. False pretenses could be one term
for it.

I my case this is just an issue of what I belive in. I have old versions of
libdes sitting on psych (from 1994) that are under the GPL. I changed my mind
about using the GPL, but versions are still available under that licence in
case some-one wants it. As for me saying I would change my attitude and try
to do an SSH, all you will ever be able to have would be my word and my track
record.

eric

• Next message: Jim Gillogly: "VeriSign cert reader"
• Previous message: Perry E. Metzger: "Re: Cryptanalysis of SecurID (ACE/Server)"