Re: [cobalt-users] Support, Warranty and Hype

[Jeff Lasman <jblists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bruce Timberlake wrote:

> Here are relevant snippets from 3 paragraphs in the License Agreement:
> 
> 1. "This Agreement also imposes certain restrictions on your use of the
> Software and Hardware."
> 
> You cannot choose to use the Software outside of its intended purpose as
> described by Sun.
> 
> 2. "You may not make a copy of any of the Software... The software on
> the OS Restore CD is intended to be used only to restore the Cobalt
> product to its initial factory functionality."

As you probably know, Bruce... Cobalt/Sun has recently started
distributing the Restore CDs via ISO download, so people no longer get
or see this agreement.  If you don't get to see it, you're not bound by
it.  It's not like a law.  Ignorance of the law is no excuse.  But if a
company doesn't tell you about a license obligation, you're not
obligated.  Tested in court many times.

What's NEVER been tested in court is the so-called shrink-wrapped
license agreement that Cobalt/Sun and just about every other software
publisher agrees on.  NEVER.  It was invented by a then friend of mine,
Seymour Rubenstein, the founder of MicroPro, publishers of the original
WordStar word processor for CP/M.  According to Seymour, no software
company has ever risked taking it to court.  I wonder why <wry grin>.

> "From the factory" means the way we ship it.  Since we don't ship a RaQ
> 3 from the factory with a RaQ 4 OS, you are _not_ restoring it to
> initial factory functionality by using a RaQ 4 OSRCD on a RaQ 3...
> 
> 3. "You may not transfer or assign your rights to use the Software
> except upon a transfer of any Hardware with which or for which it was
> supplied."
> 
> You can't separate the Software from the Hardware. They are designed to
> be used together. That is why you cannot get a CD with the Sun Cobalt UI
> to install on your own generic Linux PCs.

Have you read the terms of the license under which Red Hat Linux is
distributed?  Have you read the terms of the license under which all the
GNU tools Cobalt/Sun uses are distributed?  Have you read the license
under which Proftpd is distributed?  Under the terms of the license
under which all these products are distributed, any changes and
additions to them are covered by the same license.  So that means all
the configuration files you've created are open source.  It means the
kernels you've created are open source.  It means anything you've
bundled in such a way that the end-user cannot readily determine what is
and isn't separate property, is all opensource.  It's a VERY restrictive
license.

That's why a lot of companies won't use Linux for their products. 
FreeBSD is NOT distributed under such a restrictive license.  You CAN
use FreeBSD in a product, and still license the product restrictively;
you canNOT do that with Linux.

There's a very interesting discussion going on, on this very subject,
right now (or at least last week) at freebsd-chat.  Lot's of good
discussion, including some very good points (and some not-so-good as
well) from Computer industry columnist Brett Glass.

The one product distributed with the RaQ4 that's obviously separate, and
obviously commercial, is ChilisoftASP.

That all said, I think you can tell from my previous responses, but in
case you can't, personally I recognize the value of software and it's
authorship.  But you can't have it both ways; if you start with
opensource software, you canNOT go ahead and decide your derivative work
is proprietary.

Have you seen the Red Hat Database product?  It sells for $2295.  Guess
what you get for that $2295.  A pretty box.  Red Hat Linux 7.1. 
PostgreSQL 7.1.2.  A 12-month subscription to Red Hat Update Assistant,
unlimited phone and web support for 30 days, updates for 12 months.

Everything else in that box, including ALL the software, is OPEN
SOURCE.  It even says so on the box, and in case you're not clear on the
subject, the box says it's a truly scalable solution, since you can run
it on as many machines as you want, anywhere you want.

Now, just because Red Hat is committed to open source doesn't mean
Cobalt/Sun has to be, but just think, if Red Hat weren't, you wouldn't
even have a product, would you <wry grin>?

Have you ever seen the Red Hat Linux product sold by Macmillan
Publishing?  When they first started selling it they just copied the Red
Hat disks and put them in a box with an exact copy of the Red Hat
installation guide [also open source] and a book of their own.  Instead
of the extra Red Hat disks, some of which do include proprietary
software, they made some distribution arrangements of their own and
created their own extra disks.  But they called it Red Hat Linux, and
they never paid Red Hat a dime.  That's what open source is about.

Like I said, with the exception of ChilisoftASP.

Jeff
-- 
Jeff Lasman <jblists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Linux and Cobalt/Sun/RaQ Consulting
nobaloney.net
P. O. Box 52672, Riverside, CA  92517
voice: (909) 778-9980  *  fax: (702) 548-9484