Re: Dependence on nonfree software

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   >     > The package must not refer the user to any nonfree software; in
   >     > other words, it must not say anything that in our judgment is likely
   >     > to lead or steer users towards running or installing nonfree
   >     > software on their machine.
   > 
   > That is a good formulation.  (It should say "their own machines".)
   > But I agree an example would help make it clead.
   > 
   > Suppose you write a free program that can run in a free GNU/Linux
   > distro and talks with Google Maps.   With it, people can use Google Maps
   > and not run any nonfree JS code.  Use of this free program depends on
   > the use of the site, Google Maps, but it does not depend on _your_
   > running any nonfree program.  So it is ok on this criterion.

   The analogy doesn't hold: 

The analogy holds, only that the entity used as an example might not
be the accurate.  The point is that the license, or access to the
program on the server doesn't matter -- what matters is if the user is
required to install or run non-free software on their own local
machine.

   the server part of Google Maps is deployed by its developer and
   copyright holder, Google, on Google's own machines; the server
   software of Google Maps is free, even though unreleased, whereas we
   discuss the case where server software is proprietary.

What is the license of Google Maps?

   Then, for libre-sapienza (Savannah task #15792), the university
   and its students form a single entity: the administration
   of the university provides the students with some information
   for internal needs of the university.

Are the students, or the university running any non-free software when
they install or use libre-sapienza?