<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Ciao a tutti,<br>
<br>
Non so se tutti hanno avuto già l'occasione di leggere il memorandum
del dipartimento di difesa degli stati uniti per il software
libero/open source...<br>
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://powdermonkey.blogs.com/files/2009oss.pdf">http://powdermonkey.blogs.com/files/2009oss.pdf</a>)<br>
<br>
Mentre secondo me inizia bene...<br>
<br>
"2. GUIDANCE<br>
a. In almost all cases, OSS meets the definition of “commercial
computer software”<br>
and shall be given appropriate statutory preference in accordance with
10 USC 2377<br>
(reference (b)) (see also FAR 2.101(b), 12.000, 12.101 (reference (c));
and DFARS<br>
212.212, and 252.227-7014(a)(1) (reference (d)))."<br>
<br>
e poi continua con una ragionevole spiegazione sui tipi di licenze
aperte....<br>
<br>
"e. There is a misconception that the Government is always obligated to
distribute the<br>
source code of any modified OSS to the public, and therefore that OSS
should not be<br>
integrated or modified for use in classified or other sensitive DoD
systems. In contrast,<br>
many open source licenses permit the user to modify OSS for internal
use without being<br>
obligated to distribute source code to the public. However, if the user
chooses to<br>
distribute the modified OSS outside the user's organization (e.g., a
Government user<br>
distributes the code outside the Government), then some OSS licenses
(such as the GNU<br>
General Public License) do require distribution of the corresponding
source code to the<br>
recipient of the software. For this reason, it is important to
understand both the specifics<br>
of the open source license in question and how the Department intends
to use and<br>
redistribute any DoD-modified OSS."<br>
<br>
mi pare di capire che non finisca proprio bene, in particolare per una
frase (evidenziata qui di sotto) che è stata o scritta male (dovrebbe
essere "or when pre-existing OSS or which the government is the
copyright holder is modified...") o è stata messa li apposta per
"chiarire" (?) che il Governo US sta sopra ogni licenza (ed ogni
libertà)...<br>
<br>
"g. Software [...] developed for the<br>
Government should be released to the public (such as under an open
source license) when<br>
all of the following conditions are met:<br>
[...]<br>
(2) The Government has the rights to reproduce and release the item,
and to<br>
authorize others to do so. For example, the Government has public
release rights when<br>
the software is developed by Government personnel, when the Government
receives<br>
"unlimited rights" in software developed by a contractor at Government
expense<u><b>, or when<br>
pre-existing OSS is modified by or for the Government.</b></u><br>
[...]"<br>
<br>
Voi che impressione avete ?<br>
<br>
----<br>
Giovani<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>