[comp.windows.x] At long last -- OSF licensing summary

steve@UMIACS.UMD.EDU (05/05/90)

   Here, at long last, is the summary of responses I got to my question (a
month ago) about OSF licensing.  I asked people to tell me whether they were
a government, commercial, or educational institution; whether or not they
licensed sources successfully; what problems they had; and who they talked
to.  I received only ten responses (plus the local experiences, that makes
eleven), so the sample isn't quite as large as I'd liked.  One response
detailed two experiences with licensing.  Two other responses were from
people who were after binary distributions, and I didn't include those
responses in the numbers below.  Another response was from someone at OSF
who suggested that I join the OSF licensing SIG.  Time and financial
constraints prevent me from doing so, however.

   The fractions below indicate that someone's supposedly got a license 'in
the mail' from OSF to the licensee, or that someone had a problem that might
not have been all that bad (from their description).

Commercial sites:
	attempts: 6
	success: 4.5; 2.5 with problems

Educational/govt sites:
	attempts: 4 (including UMCP)
	success: 2 (ditto); 1 with problems (UMCP)

   From the responses I got, and from our own experience, the biggest
problem with licensing was with getting the OSF people to *call back*.
Almost everyone who had problems had problems because they couldn't get the
OSF legal people and/or help desk to respond to paper mail, voice mail, or
even their phones.  Some names were named as the people who were causing
problems (by being particularly guilty in this regard, or in other ways); I
will be more than happy to provide these names to OSF upon request by them.
One person said he called and asked for information.  He left his name and
number on the answering machine, and was never called back.

   It appears that the OSF charter prohibits OSF from offering different
license agreements to different organizations.  Thus, if one organization
needs a license modification, that modification must be made available to
other licensees, also.  This is likely to make the licensing problem
somewhat hairier for someone requesting a modification for the first time.
One person I talked to at OSF said that OSF is willing to make
modifications; previously, I'd thought that maybe OSF simply couldn't make a
change to its licenses without dissolving and re-incorporating itself so
that it could change its charter.  If you hear that OSF can't make license
changes, someone is either misinformed or is lying to you...

   One notable response pointed out that one organization has *seven*
departments who have all tried to get Motif sources at some point.  All have
failed because of legal issues.

   Our experience here was interesting.  After sending out my request for
information, I was called three or four times by two different people at
OSF.  They finally got the paperwork straightened out, and the Motif source
tape arrived this week.  (I've been holding off on my summary because I knew
something was afoot, and I wanted to give OSF the benefit of the doubt.)  I
don't want to give out their names to everyone, since I suspect that if they
get pestered a lot, they'll be somewhat less inclined to jump in and help.
If you're really stuck on a Motif (or, presumably, OSF/1) source licensing
issue, drop me a line, and I'll see what I can work out.

   I do have an archive of the responses I received.  I don't want to send
them out without checking with the authors, but if there is interest, I can
go check back with them.  Let me know.  If you don't feel that this summary
is adequate, let me know that, too, and maybe I can come up with some more
information.

	-Steve

Spoken: Steve Miller    Domain: steve@umiacs.umd.edu    UUCP: uunet!mimsy!steve
Phone: +1-301-454-1808  USPS: UMIACS, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742