Re: CU-SeeMe source licensing - no big deal

Michael Sattler, San Francisco (
Fri, 13 Jan 1995 23:25:52 -0500

What's the problem here? My interpretation (Dick?):

Non-commercial users (net geeks) will get to see, compile, change, and
otherwise play with the source code, as long as you don't try to sell it.
You can give away "value-added" versions of CU-SeeMe, just as people do
with NewsWatcher. (Of course, you'd better be sure it behaves well and
it's clearly labelled as a mutant variant strain of CU-SeeMe.)

Commercial users will have to pay for the source code IF AND ONLY IF
they'll be selling derivative products as a money-making scheme.

Executables will continue to flow from CU, as development continues
(probably/possibly in parallel with the commerical venture). This is good
news. Compare this with the share/costware versions of Eudora and BBEdit.

To the person who killed his reflector: please turn it back on again. The
sky isn't falling and Karl Marx is still dead.

Michael Sattler <> San Francisco, California |
Digital Jungle Consulting Services |
And so these men of Indostan/Disputed long and loud/Each in his own |
opinion/Exceeding stiff and strong/Though each was partly right/And |
all were in the wrong! - John Godfrey Saxe |