OpenSSL switching to non-free Apache 2.0

[Oko]

https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=149028593819547&w=2

 

[Phishfry]

Off-topic;
I found Franco's comments regarding OPNSense most enlightening. I knew something went on there but could not tell what it was.

 

[obsigna]

https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=149028593819547&w=2

I carefully read the e-mail from the OpenSSL development team, which Theo received and which he is ranting on, 3 times. It is written in a neutral, friendly manner asking for permission changing the license, and expressively leaving the option open to say No, and only in the case, people don't answer this will be taken as a Yes.

Granted, I am not a native english speaker, however honestly, I fail to see what might be the objective cause that upset Theo de Raadt that much, given, that he simply could have pressed the reply button of his e-mail client and type into the body of the reply only two letters, namely 'N' and 'O'.

My wild guess is that Sir Theo doesn't like being treated like mean people, and receiving an e-mail from an automated system like anyone else in the world, must be in his view the biggest insolence he could have been confronted with.

 

[Oko]

I carefully read the e-mail from the OpenSSL development team, which Theo received and which he is ranting on, 3 times. It is written in a neutral, friendly manner asking for permission changing the license, and expressively leaving the option open to say No, and only in the case, people don't answer this will be taken as a Yes.

Have you seen Michael W. Lucas' comment?

It's very simple. Four words.

"Silence is not consent."

Not in contracts. Not in sex. And not in licensing.

I would keep his advise in mind if you want to stay out of legal and other more serious troubles (speaking as a very protective father of two daughters) at least here in old good U.S. of A.

 

[obsigna]

Have you seen Michael W. Lucas' comment?

... "Silence is not consent." ...

And nitpicking doesn't make up for an objective cause of blocking progress.

And adding to the friendly e-mail request from the OpenSSL development team the co-notation of rape is nothing else than demagogy.

 

[NewGuy]

I see the "silence is not consent" quote come up a lot with regards to the relicensing claim and it is obviously false. Silence is agreement is most legal situations in Western countries, especially the USA. If the government, your landlord, your ISP, your cable company, your insurance company, your bank etc etc etc sends you a notice about changing the terms of your agreement or license and you do not object, then they have the right to change it. If the court sends you a notice via e-mail or Facebook and you don't reply, they assume you agreed. This is how business is done in the USA and in Canada, where Theo lives. He should know better.

The OpenSSL team is following legal advice and trying to do this change in a friendly manner with develop input. Theo should act like a grown up and acknowledge their good faith (and entirely legal) attempt to include him in the process.