Re: Dependence on nonfree software

[Ineiev]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 05:03:05AM -0500, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
...
>    > 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.

You are right, the example is wrong because servers of Google Maps
don't run proprietary software.

>    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?

Server software of Google Maps is never distributed,
so there is no license---copyright holders need no license for their
own software in order to use it, it's always free for them.

>    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?

Yes, this is the point.

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature