Main Page | Report Page

 

  Linux Forum Index » Linux Advocacy » Apple buys CUPS

Author Message
Jeanette
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:16 am
 
Looks like our "friends" at Apple bought CUPS

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L475

and seems they already made a change.

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L179+I0+T+M10+P1+Q


Article #179: License Exceptions

Created at 10:58 Jul 23, 2004 by mike

Last modified at 14:59 Jul 11, 2007

In addition, as the copyright holder of CUPS, Apple Inc. grants the
following special exceptions:

1. Apple Operating System Development License Exception;
1. Software that is developed by any person or entity for an Apple
Operating System ("Apple OS-Developed Software"), including but not
limited to Apple and third party printer drivers, filters, and backends
for an Apple Operating System, that is linked to the CUPS imaging
library or based on any sample filters or backends provided with CUPS
shall not be considered to be a derivative work or collective work based
on the CUPS program and is exempt from the mandatory source code release
clauses of the GNU GPL. You may therefore distribute linked combinations
of the CUPS imaging library with Apple OS-Developed Software without
releasing the source code of the Apple OS-Developed Software. You may
also use sample filters and backends provided with CUPS to develop Apple
OS-Developed Software without releasing the source code of the Apple
OS-Developed Software.
2. An Apple Operating System means any operating system software
developed and/or marketed by Apple Computer, Inc., including but not
limited to all existing releases and versions of Apple's Darwin, Mac OS
X, and Mac OS X Server products and all follow-on releases and future
versions thereof.
3. This exception is only available for Apple OS-Developed Software and
does not apply to software that is distributed for use on other
operating systems.
4. All CUPS software that falls under this license exception have the
following text at the top of each source file:

This file is subject to the Apple OS-Developed Software exception.
 
Linonut
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:33 am
 
After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeanette belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Quote:
Looks like our "friends" at Apple bought CUPS

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L475

and seems they already made a change.

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L179+I0+T+M10+P1+Q

This file is subject to the Apple OS-Developed Software exception.

That ain't going to fly with the FSF. Apple must release their modified
source code to their Apple users.

GPL 2:

4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program
except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt
otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is
void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this
License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights,
from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated
so long as such parties remain in full compliance.

5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify
or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions
are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License.
Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work
based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this
License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying,
distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it.


--
CUPS got Jobbed!
 
Jeanette
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:20 pm
 
Peter Köhlmann wrote:
Quote:
Linonut wrote:

After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeanette belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Looks like our "friends" at Apple bought CUPS

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L475

and seems they already made a change.

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L179+I0+T+M10+P1+Q

This file is subject to the Apple OS-Developed Software exception.
That ain't going to fly with the FSF. Apple must release their modified
source code to their Apple users.


Except that apple now are the copyright owners.
They *can* allow additional rights.
And this is an additional right, somewhat like the LGPL

CUPS itself is not changed by this, it still is under GPL
What they are talking about is additional stuff build around CUPS

I would interpret this to mean any CUPS software done for OS X does not
have to release the source
 
Roy Schestowitz
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:30 pm
 
____/ Jeanette on Thursday 12 July 2007 18:20 : \____

Quote:
Peter Köhlmann wrote:
Linonut wrote:

After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeanette belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Looks like our "friends" at Apple bought CUPS

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L475

and seems they already made a change.

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L179+I0+T+M10+P1+Q

This file is subject to the Apple OS-Developed Software exception.
That ain't going to fly with the FSF. Apple must release their modified
source code to their Apple users.


Except that apple now are the copyright owners.
They *can* allow additional rights.
And this is an additional right, somewhat like the LGPL

CUPS itself is not changed by this, it still is under GPL
What they are talking about is additional stuff build around CUPS

I would interpret this to mean any CUPS software done for OS X does not
have to release the source

Let's just hope they don't subvert and divert attention in the project. It has
a FOSS focus. When Microsoft buys software that's Apple oriented, it's a death
knell.

Parallels/Wine comes to mind here, but it's a different type of situation.

--
~~ Best of wishes

Roy S. Schestowitz | #ff0000 Hot Chilli Peppers
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Mem: 515500k total, 447480k used, 68020k free, 3672k buffers
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
 
The Ghost In The Machine
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:36 pm
 
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jeanette
<jrusso2@hotmail.com>
wrote
on Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:20:34 -0700
<Cptli.72586$tL1.32329@newsfe22.lga>:
Quote:
Peter Köhlmann wrote:
Linonut wrote:

After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeanette belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Looks like our "friends" at Apple bought CUPS

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L475

and seems they already made a change.

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L179+I0+T+M10+P1+Q

This file is subject to the Apple OS-Developed Software exception.
That ain't going to fly with the FSF. Apple must release their modified
source code to their Apple users.


Except that apple now are the copyright owners.
They *can* allow additional rights.
And this is an additional right, somewhat like the LGPL

CUPS itself is not changed by this, it still is under GPL
What they are talking about is additional stuff build around CUPS

I would interpret this to mean any CUPS software done for OS X does not
have to release the source

Ditto here, though it could get interesting since Apple was
(is?) also in the printer business (though I'll admit to
wondering if the LaserWriter was an OEM-type deal or what).

In short, Apple bought CUPS, brings out brand new printers,
CUPS only works with those printers if it's running on MacOSX.
Who does what?

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #10239993:
char * f(char *p) {char *q = malloc(strlen(p)); strcpy(q,p); return q; }

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
Rick
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:21 pm
 
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:36:18 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

Quote:
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jeanette
jrusso2@hotmail.com
wrote
on Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:20:34 -0700
Cptli.72586$tL1.32329@newsfe22.lga>:
Peter Köhlmann wrote:
Linonut wrote:

After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeanette belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Looks like our "friends" at Apple bought CUPS

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L475

and seems they already made a change.

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L179+I0+T+M10+P1+Q

This file is subject to the Apple OS-Developed Software exception.
That ain't going to fly with the FSF. Apple must release their
modified source code to their Apple users.


Except that apple now are the copyright owners. They *can* allow
additional rights.
And this is an additional right, somewhat like the LGPL

CUPS itself is not changed by this, it still is under GPL What they
are talking about is additional stuff build around CUPS

I would interpret this to mean any CUPS software done for OS X does not
have to release the source

Ditto here, though it could get interesting since Apple was (is?) also
in the printer business (though I'll admit to wondering if the
LaserWriter was an OEM-type deal or what).

In short, Apple bought CUPS, brings out brand new printers, CUPS only
works with those printers if it's running on MacOSX. Who does what?


Someone else writes a CUPS driver for it if there is a demand to use it
on non-Macs.


--
Rick
 
Rex Ballard
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:31 pm
 
On Jul 12, 12:39 pm, Peter Köhlmann <peter.koehlm...@t-online.de>
wrote:
Quote:
Linonut wrote:
After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeanette belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Except that apple now are the copyright owners.

Interesting point here is that there are lots of contributors to CUPS,
and several thousand staff-years of support. Apple does not own that,
and has not properly compensated those contributors.

If Apple wants to behave and be a good corporate citizen, they can
continue to support CUPS as a non-profit organization, but attempting
to take "ownership" exposes them to legal liabilities, tax
consequences, and SEC issues, that I'm not sure they really want to
deal with.

Quote:
They *can* allow additional rights.
And this is an additional right, somewhat like the LGPL

But this is revoking some of the terms under which original support
was provided. There were other alternatives to CUPS, and CUPS won out
because lots of contributors contributed $millions, possibly hundreds
of $millions worth of time, effort, resources, and intellectual
property - to the effort.

Now Apple is saying that if you make changes to CUPS for OS/X, THEY
don't have to publish those source code changes. So if Cannon creates
a CUPS plug-in, it might ONLY work for OS/X - and the Linux/BSD
community gets screwed.

This is NOT what those contibutors, distributors, advocates,
supporters, testers, and developers agreed to. If Apple wants to
alter that agreement, they have to get unanimous agreement from ALL of
those contributors.
 
[H]omer
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:45 pm
 
Verily I say unto thee, that Linonut spake thusly:
Quote:
After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeanette belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Looks like our "friends" at Apple bought CUPS

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L475

and seems they already made a change.

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L179+I0+T+M10+P1+Q

This file is subject to the Apple OS-Developed Software exception.

That ain't going to fly with the FSF. Apple must release their modified
source code to their Apple users.

GPL 2:

4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program
except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt
otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is
void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this
License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights,
from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated
so long as such parties remain in full compliance.

5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify
or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions
are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License.
Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work
based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this
License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying,
distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it.

The key phrase here being "derivative works".

An important question that needs answering, is how does Apple propose
releasing proprietary blobs to CUPS in such a way that does not violate
the GPL? AFAICT if it links GPL code, it must conform to the GPL license.

I'd also be interested to know how much of CUPS, including drivers, was
*not* contributed by Michael R Sweet? IOW - Was permission sought from
*all* parties to change the license, if that is indeed what has happened?

--
K.
http://slated.org

..----
| "Computer games don’t affect kids, I mean if Pac man affected us as
| kids, we’d all be running around in darkened rooms, munching pills
| and listening to repetitive music." - Kristian Wilson, Nintendo
`----

Fedora release 7 (Moonshine) on sky, running kernel 2.6.21-1.3194.fc7
19:43:46 up 11 days, 18:38, 2 users, load average: 0.28, 0.41, 0.43
 
Steven Spicolli
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:59 pm
 
"Rex Ballard" <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184265091.582331.175210@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 12, 12:39 pm, Peter Köhlmann <peter.koehlm...@t-online.de>
wrote:
Quote:
Linonut wrote:
After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeanette belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Except that apple now are the copyright owners.

Interesting point here is that there are lots of contributors to CUPS,
and several thousand staff-years of support. Apple does not own that,
and has not properly compensated those contributors.

If Apple wants to behave and be a good corporate citizen, they can
continue to support CUPS as a non-profit organization, but attempting
to take "ownership" exposes them to legal liabilities, tax
consequences, and SEC issues, that I'm not sure they really want to
deal with.

Quote:
They *can* allow additional rights.
And this is an additional right, somewhat like the LGPL

But this is revoking some of the terms under which original support
was provided. There were other alternatives to CUPS, and CUPS won out
because lots of contributors contributed $millions, possibly hundreds
of $millions worth of time, effort, resources, and intellectual
property - to the effort.

Now Apple is saying that if you make changes to CUPS for OS/X, THEY
don't have to publish those source code changes. So if Cannon creates
a CUPS plug-in, it might ONLY work for OS/X - and the Linux/BSD
community gets screwed.

This is NOT what those contibutors, distributors, advocates,
supporters, testers, and developers agreed to. If Apple wants to
alter that agreement, they have to get unanimous agreement from ALL of
those contributors.




I'm quite certain that the armies of lawyers employed by Apple understand
the situation far better than you do.

* Steven



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
Peter Köhlmann
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:03 pm
 
Steven Spicolli wrote:

Quote:

"Rex Ballard" <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184265091.582331.175210@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 12, 12:39 pm, Peter Köhlmann <peter.koehlm...@t-online.de
wrote:
Linonut wrote:
After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeanette belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Except that apple now are the copyright owners.

Interesting point here is that there are lots of contributors to CUPS,
and several thousand staff-years of support. Apple does not own that,
and has not properly compensated those contributors.

If Apple wants to behave and be a good corporate citizen, they can
continue to support CUPS as a non-profit organization, but attempting
to take "ownership" exposes them to legal liabilities, tax
consequences, and SEC issues, that I'm not sure they really want to
deal with.

They *can* allow additional rights.
And this is an additional right, somewhat like the LGPL

But this is revoking some of the terms under which original support
was provided. There were other alternatives to CUPS, and CUPS won out
because lots of contributors contributed $millions, possibly hundreds
of $millions worth of time, effort, resources, and intellectual
property - to the effort.

Now Apple is saying that if you make changes to CUPS for OS/X, THEY
don't have to publish those source code changes. So if Cannon creates
a CUPS plug-in, it might ONLY work for OS/X - and the Linux/BSD
community gets screwed.

This is NOT what those contibutors, distributors, advocates,
supporters, testers, and developers agreed to. If Apple wants to
alter that agreement, they have to get unanimous agreement from ALL of
those contributors.


I'm quite certain that the armies of lawyers employed by Apple understand
the situation far better than you do.

* Steven


Well, certainly also a lot better than you do
--
Windows is just the instable version of Linux for users who are too
dumb to handle the real thing
 
Nedd Ludd
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:16 pm
 
"Rex Ballard" <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184265091.582331.175210@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

: Interesting point here is that there are lots of contributors to CUPS,
: and several thousand staff-years of support. Apple does not own that,
: and has not properly compensated those contributors.

What compensation would the contributors expect beyand what they've already
recieved?
 
Nedd Ludd
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:22 pm
 
"[H]omer" <spam@uce.gov> wrote in message news:cf9im4-a07.ln1@sky.matrix...
:
: An important question that needs answering, is how does Apple propose
: releasing proprietary blobs to CUPS in such a way that does not violate
: the GPL? AFAICT if it links GPL code, it must conform to the GPL license.

Apple owns the program. They can license it as they see fit. If CUPS was
GPL'ed then Apple can slap a Berkley license on it and not have to worry
about the GLP 3 lunacy.

If it is acceptible for a software license to change from GPL 2 to GPL 3
then it is acceptible for the license to change from GLP to BSD. The terms
of the license change in both cases.
 
Nedd Ludd
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:31 pm
 
"Steven Spicolli" <Spicolli@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:46966de0$0$16393$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
:
: Now Apple is saying that if you make changes to CUPS for OS/X, THEY
: don't have to publish those source code changes. So if Cannon creates
: a CUPS plug-in, it might ONLY work for OS/X - and the Linux/BSD
: community gets screwed.
:
: This is NOT what those contibutors, distributors, advocates,
: supporters, testers, and developers agreed to. If Apple wants to
: alter that agreement, they have to get unanimous agreement from ALL of
: those contributors.
:

To win in court the contibutors, distributors, advocates, supporters,
testers, and developers will need to proove they have 'standing'. Without
standing, you're not in a postition to complain. I question whether anyone
in the groups you listed have standing.

:
: I'm quite certain that the armies of lawyers employed by Apple understand
: the situation far better than you do.
:

I am sure Apple has some fine lawyers.
 
Nedd Ludd
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:34 pm
 
"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote in message
news:1276854.S4CbW8C9sn@schestowitz.com...
:
: Let's just hope they don't subvert and divert attention in the project. It
has
: a FOSS focus. When Microsoft buys software that's Apple oriented, it's a
death
: knell.
:

If you don't like the direction CUPS takes then you can write your own.
 
The Ghost In The Machine
Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:42 pm
 
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Rick
<none@nomail.com>
wrote
on Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:21:50 -0000
<139cs9u3qquf7eb@news.supernews.com>:
Quote:
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:36:18 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jeanette
jrusso2@hotmail.com
wrote
on Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:20:34 -0700
Cptli.72586$tL1.32329@newsfe22.lga>:
Peter Köhlmann wrote:
Linonut wrote:

After takin' a swig o' grog, Jeanette belched out this bit o' wisdom:

Looks like our "friends" at Apple bought CUPS

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L475

and seems they already made a change.

http://www.cups.org/articles.php?L179+I0+T+M10+P1+Q

This file is subject to the Apple OS-Developed Software exception.
That ain't going to fly with the FSF. Apple must release their
modified source code to their Apple users.


Except that apple now are the copyright owners. They *can* allow
additional rights.
And this is an additional right, somewhat like the LGPL

CUPS itself is not changed by this, it still is under GPL What they
are talking about is additional stuff build around CUPS

I would interpret this to mean any CUPS software done for OS X does not
have to release the source

Ditto here, though it could get interesting since Apple was (is?) also
in the printer business (though I'll admit to wondering if the
LaserWriter was an OEM-type deal or what).

In short, Apple bought CUPS, brings out brand new printers, CUPS only
works with those printers if it's running on MacOSX. Who does what?


Someone else writes a CUPS driver for it if there is a demand to use it
on non-Macs.


That is indeed a possibility, if Apple publishes specs
for this hypothetical new printer. (Since the printer
market isn't all that new, one could probably use an
older converter/filter [*] for awhile, or tweak said older
converter/filter if the resolution is different.)

[*] Not sure exactly what to call it; the actual driver in
Linux space is the parallel or serial port, both of which
are very simple beasts, or the driver is the network stack.
Presumably, CUPS uses utility programs/scripts to convert
Postscript or text or images to a format the printer likes.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
"Woman? What woman?"

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
 
Page 1 of 3    Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Wed Jul 30, 2014 10:18 pm