1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
|
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 -->
<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html -->
<!--#set var="TAGS" value="essays licensing non-cpleft" -->
<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" -->
<title>Problems with older versions of the Apple License (APSL)
- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/historical-apsl.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
<div class="article reduced-width">
<h2>The Problems with older versions of the Apple Public Source License (APSL)</h2>
<div class="announcement">
<p>The current version of the Apple Public Source License (APSL) does not
have any of these problems. <a href="/philosophy/apsl.html">You can
read our current position on the APSL elsewhere</a>. This document is
kept here for historical purposes only.</p>
</div>
<hr class="thin" />
<h3>FSF Position on the Older Versions of APSL</h3>
<p>
Apple released an updated version, 1.1, of the APSL but it remained
unacceptable. They changed the termination clause into a
“suspension” clause, but it still had the same kind of bad
effects.</p>
<p>
In January 2001, Apple released another version, APSL 1.2. This
version fixes two of the fatal flaws, but one still remains: any
modified version “deployed” in an organization must be
published. The APSL 1.2 has taken two large steps towards a free
software license, but still has one more large step to take before it
qualifies.</p>
<p>
Below, is the original commentary on the first version of the APSL,
version 1.0.</p>
<h3>Original APSL Commentary</h3>
<p>
After studying Apple's new source code license, the APSL, I have
concluded that it falls short of being a free software license. It
has three fatal flaws, any of which would be sufficient to make the
software less than free.</p>
<h4>Disrespect for privacy</h4>
<p>
The APSL does not allow you to make a modified version and use it for
your own private purposes, without publishing your changes.</p>
<h4>Central control</h4>
<p>
Anyone who releases (or even uses, other than for R&D) a modified
version is required to notify one specific organization, which happens
to be Apple.</p>
<h4>Possibility of revocation at any time</h4>
<p>
The termination clause says that Apple can revoke this license, and
forbid you to keep using all or some part of the software, any time
someone makes an accusation of patent or copyright infringement.</p>
<p>
In this way, if Apple declines to fight a questionable patent (or
one whose applicability to the code at hand is questionable), you
will not be able to have your own day in court to fight it, because
you would have to fight Apple's copyright as well.</p>
<p>
Such a termination clause is especially bad for users outside the
US, since it makes them indirectly vulnerable to the insane US
patent system and the incompetent US patent office, which ordinarily
could not touch them in their own countries.</p>
<p>
Any one of these flaws makes a license unacceptable.</p>
<p>
If these three flaws were solved, the APSL would be a free software
license with three major practical problems, reminiscent of the NPL:</p>
<ul>
<li>It is not a true copyleft, because it allows linking with other
files which may be entirely proprietary.</li>
<li>It is unfair, since it requires you to give Apple rights
to your changes which Apple will not give you for its code.</li>
<li>It is incompatible with the GPL.</li>
</ul>
<p>
Of course, the major difference between the NPL and the APSL is that
the NPL <b>is</b> a free software license. These problems are
significant in the case of the NPL because the NPL has no fatal flaws.
Would that the same were true of the APSL.</p>
<p>
At a fundamental level, the APSL makes a claim that, if it became
accepted, would stretch copyright powers in a dangerous way: it claims
to be able to set conditions for simply <b>running</b> the software.
As I understand it, copyright law in the US does not permit this,
except when encryption or a license manager is used to enforce the
conditions. It would be terribly ironic if a failed attempt at making
a free software license resulted in an extension of the effective
range of copyright power.</p>
<p>
Aside from this, we must remember that only part of MacOS is being
released under the APSL. Even if the fatal flaws and practical
problems of the APSL were fixed, even if it were changed into a very
good free software license, that would do no good for the other parts
of MacOS whose source code is not being released at all. We must
not judge all of a company by just part of what they do.</p>
<p>
Overall, I think that Apple's action is an example of the effects of
the year-old <a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">“open
source” movement</a>: of its plan to appeal to business with the
purely materialistic goal of faster development, while putting aside
the deeper issues of freedom, community, cooperation, and what kind of
society we want to live in.</p>
<p>
Apple has grasped perfectly the concept with which “open
source” is promoted, which is “show users the source and
they will help you fix bugs.” What Apple has not
grasped—or has dismissed—is the spirit of free software,
which is that we form a community to cooperate on the commons of
software.</p>
</div>
</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div id="footer" role="contentinfo">
<div class="unprintable">
<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>.
There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p>
<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
replace it with the translation of these two:
We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
<web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p>
<p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of
our web pages, see <a
href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
README</a>. -->
Please see the <a
href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations
of this article.</p>
</div>
<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this
without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
document was modified, or published.
If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
<p>Copyright © 1999, 2001, 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative
Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p>
<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
<p class="unprintable">Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
$Date: 2021/09/10 10:58:36 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
</body>
</html>
|
