[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [fsf-community-team] Enhancements and fixes for js-encumbered websit
Re: [fsf-community-team] Enhancements and fixes for js-encumbered websites
Fri, 02 Jul 2021 21:02:29 +1000
mu4e 1.4.13; emacs 27.2
W. Kosior <email@example.com> writes:
Nice documentation - lots of food for thought, thanks! (Also
project looks like a great initialtive)
One minor question about the documentation:
> LibreJS' strategy of judging scripts based on a license
> fails for example when someone takes an X11-licensed js
> modifies it and serves a minified version of the modified lib
> their site. LibreJS will allow this script to execute, even
> though the modifications are obviously nonfree.
Why would the modifications be nonfree in this case?
is a derivative like compilation, and if the source is licensed
under X11, and if the modified version is also under a free
license, then there's no problem LibreJS allows it to execute.
I am assuming the case where released are:
- original source code, with free license
- minified modified source code, with free license
and the non-minified modified source code is kept secret
True, but in this case the webmaster would be lying, and it is
equivalent to a bad developer making a binary out of proprietary
code and saying the binary is from some freely licensed code. It
would be good to verify the source-binary correspondence, but it
is something extra, and not LibreJS's fault to allow the
Actually, it does not even need to be a _modified_ library. A
webmaster could just write some code from ground up and serve it
minified-only with a free license attached.
This is almost equivalent to license a binary without source under
GPL. IMO it is more of an issue of license compliance.
PGP Key: 47F9 D050 1E11 8879 9040 4941 2126 7E93 EF86 DFD0
Description: PGP signature
Re: Enhancements and fixes for js-encumbered websites, John Sullivan, 2021/07/02