Re: Dependence on nonfree software

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   [1:text/plain Hide]

   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.

The distribution aspect is a tanget in this situation, if there is no
license (i.e., default copyright all restrictions) -- then the
software is still under a non-free license.