| php license [message #173769] |
Wed, 04 May 2011 02:05  |
Aleks Kleyn
Messages: 9
Registered: May 2011
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
when I setup MSI file from http://us3.php.net/downloads.php web site, it
shows license agreement which includes following text
3. The name "PHP" must not be used to endorse or promote products
derived from this software without prior written permission. For
written permission, please contact group(at)php(dot)net.
4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
from group(at)php(dot)net. You may indicate that your software works in
conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
Does it mean that I cannot use php files.on public web site?
Thank you, Aleks Kleyn
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173771 is a reply to message #173769] |
Wed, 04 May 2011 02:42  |
P E Schoen
Messages: 86
Registered: January 2011
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
"Aleks Kleyn" wrote in message news:4dc0b472$1$9092$607ed4bc(at)cv(dot)net...
> Does it mean that I cannot use php files.on public web site?
Read:
http://us3.php.net/license/
and
http://www.php.net/license/3_01.txt
There is certainly no restriction on using the .php extension, as that is
required (at least for normal server setups). And the restrictions seem to
be more of a guideline rather than enforced by copyright law, unless you use
the source files without permission.
But I may be wrong. Hopefully the experts will confirm (or refute) my
opinion.
Paul
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173778 is a reply to message #173769] |
Wed, 04 May 2011 10:42 |
me
Messages: 192
Registered: September 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 5/3/2011 10:05 PM, Aleks Kleyn wrote:
> when I setup MSI file from http://us3.php.net/downloads.php web site, it
> shows license agreement which includes following text
>
> 3. The name "PHP" must not be used to endorse or promote products
> derived from this software without prior written permission. For
> written permission, please contact group(at)php(dot)net.
>
> 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
> may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
> from group(at)php(dot)net. You may indicate that your software works in
> conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
> it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
>
>
> Does it mean that I cannot use php files.on public web site?
>
> Thank you, Aleks Kleyn
The key here is the phrase, "products derived from this software." That
is quite different from "scripts written with this software language." A
product derived from PHP would be another scripting language. So the
license agreement means that if you did derive another language from PHP
(which the license agreement does not prevent you from doing), you could
not name it "Another PHP", but you could name it KLEYN, or PENCIL or
FLASHLIGHT or TABLE, etc.
Bill B
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173779 is a reply to message #173769] |
Wed, 04 May 2011 10:51 |
alvaro.NOSPAMTHANX
Messages: 277
Registered: September 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
El 04/05/2011 4:05, Aleks Kleyn escribió/wrote:
> when I setup MSI file from http://us3.php.net/downloads.php web site, it
> shows license agreement which includes following text
>
> 3. The name "PHP" must not be used to endorse or promote products
> derived from this software without prior written permission. For
> written permission, please contact group(at)php(dot)net.
>
> 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
> may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
> from group(at)php(dot)net. You may indicate that your software works in
> conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
> it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
>
>
> Does it mean that I cannot use php files.on public web site?
It means that you can take the source code of the PHP interpreter
(written in C), make changes to it and advertise it as "Kleyn Language",
but you are not allowed to call it "SuperPHP" unless you are granted
explicit permission. Which make sense.
--
-- http://alvaro.es - Álvaro G. Vicario - Burgos, Spain
-- Mi sitio sobre programación web: http://borrame.com
-- Mi web de humor satinado: http://www.demogracia.com
--
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173783 is a reply to message #173769] |
Wed, 04 May 2011 15:51 |
Thomas 'PointedEars'
Messages: 701
Registered: October 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Aleks Kleyn wrote:
> when I setup MSI file from http://us3.php.net/downloads.php web site, it
> shows license agreement which includes following text
> [?]
> Does it mean that I cannot use php files.on public web site?
No.
PointedEars
--
Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
-- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f806at$ail$1$8300dec7(at)news(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173784 is a reply to message #173771] |
Wed, 04 May 2011 18:01 |
Thomas 'PointedEars'
Messages: 701
Registered: October 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
P E Schoen wrote:
> "Aleks Kleyn" wrote in message news:4dc0b472$1$9092$607ed4bc(at)cv(dot)net...
>> Does it mean that I cannot use php files.on public web site?
>
> Read:
> http://us3.php.net/license/
> and
> http://www.php.net/license/3_01.txt
>
> There is certainly no restriction on using the .php extension, as that is
> required (at least for normal server setups). And the restrictions seem to
> be more of a guideline rather than enforced by copyright law, unless you
> use the source files without permission.
>
> But I may be wrong. Hopefully the experts will confirm (or refute) my
> opinion.
You are wrong (and alarmingly naive) thinking that a software license is not
legally binding; it is. People have been successfully sued for violating a
software license before; whole companies had to shut down because the
damages they had to pay for license violation ruined their business.
However, the referred sections are not about "the .php extension" (and the
OP did not ask about that in the first place). They are about using the
name "PHP" in the name of one's own product and to promote that product
using the PHP name. That is generally possible, but you need *written
permission* from the PHP people first (presumably they say so because they
want to make sure that the "PHP" name is not being abused.) So we can
assume that, e.g., the creators of Eclipse PHP Development Tools, and PhpED,
and the webmasters of PHPBuilder.net and Planet PHP, to name just a few, did
just that.)
HTH
PointedEars (IANAL)
--
Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
-- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f806at$ail$1$8300dec7(at)news(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173785 is a reply to message #173769] |
Wed, 04 May 2011 22:14 |
VanguardLH
Messages: 5
Registered: April 2011
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Aleks Kleyn wrote:
> when I setup MSI file from http://us3.php.net/downloads.php web site, it
> shows license agreement which includes following text
>
> 3. The name "PHP" must not be used to endorse or promote products
> derived from this software without prior written permission. For
> written permission, please contact group(at)php(dot)net.
You cannot use PHP to build yet another programming language. That is,
PHP cannot be the base for your new language without first getting
permission. If you want to build something atop of PHP, like PHP-Plus,
then you have to ask because the founders of PHP probably don't want the
quality of their product polluted with bad projects that build up from
PHP as their base.
If you want to use their codebase for their PHP product in your
derivative product then you need permission. Writing scripts that rely
on their interpreter to execute is NOT stealing the code of that
interpreter.
> 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
> may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
> from group(at)php(dot)net. You may indicate that your software works in
> conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
> it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
You cannot use "PHP" in the product's title. Something like
"PHPfantastic" is a no-no. Just because you use PHP to code your
product doesn't grant you permission to use "PHP" (as a distinct
reference) in your product name. "SLOPHP" for something related to HP
would be okay, however.
This is like a trademark. A similar story is Radio Shack who
trademarked the "Shack" product and company name. I remember one store
named "CD Shack" that lost the legal fight (the court proceedings lasted
all of 3 days). "PHP" is already a product name. You can't call your
product "Microsoft Word Lite" because you aren't Microsoft and Word is
*their* copyrighted code. You could use "Thin Client for MS Word". One
says MS Word is your product (and it is not) while the other says your
product is for use with someone else's product.
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173790 is a reply to message #173779] |
Thu, 05 May 2011 00:33 |
Aleks Kleyn
Messages: 9
Registered: May 2011
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
""lvaro G. Vicario"" <alvaro(dot)NOSPAMTHANX(at)demogracia(dot)com(dot)invalid> wrote in
message news:iprb44$9d6$1(at)dont-email(dot)me...
> El 04/05/2011 4:05, Aleks Kleyn escribi/wrote:
>> when I setup MSI file from http://us3.php.net/downloads.php web site, it
>> shows license agreement which includes following text
>>
>> 3. The name "PHP" must not be used to endorse or promote products
>> derived from this software without prior written permission. For
>> written permission, please contact group(at)php(dot)net.
>>
>> 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
>> may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
>> from group(at)php(dot)net. You may indicate that your software works in
>> conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
>> it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
>>
>>
>> Does it mean that I cannot use php files.on public web site?
>
> It means that you can take the source code of the PHP interpreter (written
> in C), make changes to it and advertise it as "Kleyn Language", but you
> are not allowed to call it "SuperPHP" unless you are granted explicit
> permission. Which make sense.
>
>
> --
> -- http://alvaro.es - lvaro G. Vicario - Burgos, Spain
> -- Mi sitio sobre programacin web: http://borrame.com
> -- Mi web de humor satinado: http://www.demogracia.com
> --
i think if you take source code for PHP and derive on it another language,
this will be also breaking author's right, whatever name you will give to
new language,
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173794 is a reply to message #173790] |
Thu, 05 May 2011 07:56 |
alvaro.NOSPAMTHANX
Messages: 277
Registered: September 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
El 05/05/2011 2:33, Aleks Kleyn escribió/wrote:
> ""Álvaro G. Vicario""<alvaro(dot)NOSPAMTHANX(at)demogracia(dot)com(dot)invalid> wrote in
> message news:iprb44$9d6$1(at)dont-email(dot)me...
>> El 04/05/2011 4:05, Aleks Kleyn escribió/wrote:
>>> when I setup MSI file from http://us3.php.net/downloads.php web site, it
>>> shows license agreement which includes following text
>>>
>>> 3. The name "PHP" must not be used to endorse or promote products
>>> derived from this software without prior written permission. For
>>> written permission, please contact group(at)php(dot)net.
>>>
>>> 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
>>> may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
>>> from group(at)php(dot)net. You may indicate that your software works in
>>> conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
>>> it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
>>>
>>>
>>> Does it mean that I cannot use php files.on public web site?
>>
>> It means that you can take the source code of the PHP interpreter (written
>> in C), make changes to it and advertise it as "Kleyn Language", but you
>> are not allowed to call it "SuperPHP" unless you are granted explicit
>> permission. Which make sense.
[...]
> i think if you take source code for PHP and derive on it another language,
> this will be also breaking author's right, whatever name you will give to
> new language,
Well, that's not mentioned in the licence text you've quoted (which
clearly refers to the PHP *name*). If you have a look at the "PHP
Codebase" section at http://www.php.net/license/ it clearly states that
it's an open source licence with less restrictions than the GPL.
Following the OSD link:
3. Derived Works
The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must
allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license
of the original software.
This is just the basic principle of open source software: it can be
free-as-in-beer or not, but it *has to* be free-as-in-speech. Derived
works are very common: just think of LibreOffice or all those MySQL
forks. But, in general, names and trademarks are different stuff. You
are free to make your own version of Red Hat but you need to give it a
different name (such as CentOS) because you don't own the "Red Hat" name
and its owner does not grant to permission to use it.
--
-- http://alvaro.es - Álvaro G. Vicario - Burgos, Spain
-- Mi sitio sobre programación web: http://borrame.com
-- Mi web de humor satinado: http://www.demogracia.com
--
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173804 is a reply to message #173785] |
Thu, 05 May 2011 16:10 |
Thomas 'PointedEars'
Messages: 701
Registered: October 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
VanguardLH wrote:
> Aleks Kleyn wrote:
>> when I setup MSI file from http://us3.php.net/downloads.php web site, it
>> shows license agreement which includes following text
>>
>> 3. The name "PHP" must not be used to endorse or promote products
>> derived from this software without prior written permission. For
>> written permission, please contact group(at)php(dot)net.
>
> You cannot use PHP to build yet another programming language. That is,
> PHP cannot be the base for your new language without first getting
> permission.
Wrong. This is about endorsement and promotion, and it is about name, not
foundation. Suppose you do a new language that is based on PHP that does
not have "PHP" in its name, then you do not need that written permission in
order to endorse or promote it; otherwise you do.
> If you want to build something atop of PHP, like PHP-Plus,
> then you have to ask because the founders of PHP probably don't want the
> quality of their product polluted with bad projects that build up from
> PHP as their base.
That is correct for this particular example only because it includes "PHP"
in the name of the new language.
> If you want to use their codebase for their PHP product in your
> derivative product then you need permission.
No. *That* permission is explicitly granted by the license.
> Writing scripts that rely on their interpreter to execute is NOT stealing
> the code of that interpreter.
Nor would be using it as basis. PHP is Open Source, after all. Again, this
is only about names.
>> 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
>> may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
>> from group(at)php(dot)net. You may indicate that your software works in
>> conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
>> it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
>
> You cannot use "PHP" in the product's title. Something like
> "PHPfantastic" is a no-no. Just because you use PHP to code your
> product doesn't grant you permission to use "PHP" (as a distinct
> reference) in your product name. "SLOPHP" for something related to HP
> would be okay, however.
Nonsense. "SLOPHP" would make no difference (as it is a variant of
"phpfoo", and you can use "PHP" in the product's _name_ if you have
requested and gotten written permission.
Why are you reinterpreting and misinterpreting what is written there?
It could not be more clear.
PointedEars (IANAL)
--
Danny Goodman's books are out of date and teach practices that are
positively harmful for cross-browser scripting.
-- Richard Cornford, cljs, <cife6q$253$1$8300dec7(at)news(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk> (2004)
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173806 is a reply to message #173790] |
Thu, 05 May 2011 17:23 |
Thomas 'PointedEars'
Messages: 701
Registered: October 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Aleks Kleyn wrote:
> Alvaro G. Vicario wrote:
>> Aleks Kleyn wrote:
>>> when I setup MSI file from http://us3.php.net/downloads.php web site,
>>> it shows license agreement which includes following text
>>>
>>> 3. The name "PHP" must not be used to endorse or promote products
>>> derived from this software without prior written permission. For
>>> written permission, please contact group(at)php(dot)net.
>>>
>>> 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
>>> may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
>>> from group(at)php(dot)net. You may indicate that your software works in
>>> conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
>>> it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
>>>
>>>
>>> Does it mean that I cannot use php files.on public web site?
>>
>> It means that you can take the source code of the PHP interpreter
>> (written in C), make changes to it and advertise it as "Kleyn Language",
>> but you are not allowed to call it "SuperPHP" unless you are granted
>> explicit permission. Which make sense.
>
> i think if you take source code for PHP and derive on it another language,
> this will be also breaking author's right, whatever name you will give to
> new language,
No, Alvaro is correct. PHP is Open Source. It is *intended* to be derived
from (according to the FSF, it only does not qualify as free software
because of the "PHP" name issue¹). Read before you think, and think before
you post.
PointedEars
___________
¹ <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses>
--
Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on
a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web,
when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another
computer, another word processor, or another network. -- Tim Berners-Lee
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173807 is a reply to message #173804] |
Thu, 05 May 2011 19:20 |
Thomas 'PointedEars'
Messages: 701
Registered: October 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> VanguardLH wrote:
>> Aleks Kleyn wrote:
>>> 4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
>>> may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
>>> from group(at)php(dot)net. You may indicate that your software works in
>>> conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
>>> it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
>>
>> You cannot use "PHP" in the product's title. Something like
>> "PHPfantastic" is a no-no. Just because you use PHP to code your
>> product doesn't grant you permission to use "PHP" (as a distinct
>> reference) in your product name. "SLOPHP" for something related to HP
>> would be okay, however.
>
> Nonsense. "SLOPHP" would make no difference (as it is a variant of
> "phpfoo", and you can use "PHP" in the product's _name_ if you have
> requested and gotten written permission.
Sorry, you are partially right, I misread you a bit. "SLOPHP" for something
related to "HP" would be OK, as it would not be a "distinct reference" to
PHP. However, e.g. "PHPfantastic" for a PHP add-on would be possible, but
required written permission according to this license prior to use.
PointedEars (IANAL)
--
var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = (
navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1
&& navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1
) // Plone, register_function.js:16
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173808 is a reply to message #173804] |
Thu, 05 May 2011 19:50 |
VanguardLH
Messages: 5
Registered: April 2011
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Nonsense. "SLOPHP" would make no difference (as it is a variant of
> "phpfoo", and you can use "PHP" in the product's _name_ if you have
> requested and gotten written permission.
SLOPHP wasn't SLO-PHP. It was meant to represent SLOP-HP, and HP is for
Hewlett's Packard, not PHP. No one can prevent you legally from using a
series of characters in your product name simply because a substring may
match on your product name. WhimsWorder would be a legal product name
despite having msword as a substring.
|
|
|
|
| Re: php license [message #173809 is a reply to message #173808] |
Thu, 05 May 2011 20:30 |
Thomas 'PointedEars'
Messages: 701
Registered: October 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
VanguardLH wrote:
> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Nonsense. "SLOPHP" would make no difference (as it is a variant of
>> "phpfoo", and you can use "PHP" in the product's _name_ if you have
>> requested and gotten written permission.
>
> SLOPHP wasn't SLO-PHP. It was meant to represent SLOP-HP, and HP is for
> Hewlett's Packard, not PHP.
ACK, see also my correction 30 minutes earlier.
> No one can prevent you legally from using a series of characters in your
> product name simply because a substring may match on your product name.
AFAIK, that is not entirely correct. For example, back in 1995, an
agreement was required so that Netscape Communications Corporation could use
Sun Microsystems, Inc.'s Java trademark in their JavaScript (formerly,
LiveScript). So suppose we would extend your example to read "Sloppy HP",
which could be (mis)understood to be derogatory, it is entirely possible
that Hewlett-Packard Company could sue and win.
> WhimsWorder would be a legal product name despite having msword as a
> substring.
ISTM the letter case would make all the difference, but I'll leave that for
the lawyers to decide (IANAL).
PointedEars
--
var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = (
navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1
&& navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1
) // Plone, register_function.js:16
|
|
|
|
Calendar
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
]