Does the python library of Google Data API is truly free?

Diez B. Roggisch deets at
Tue Jun 10 17:33:58 CEST 2008

> I don't speak about hosting else rights about data, data that are
> entered by people:
> "By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give
> Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-
> exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish,
> publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which
> you submit, post or display on or through, the Services..."
> "You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make
> such Content available to other companies, organizations or
> individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of
> syndicated services..."

This does not affect the distinction between a SERVICE that has it's own
terms and conditions with a SOFTWARE that provides the means to use that
service from a programmers or users point of view. Unless you rid yourself
of that misconception, this discussion is fruitless.
>> Or if they prohibit you to host malicious, offending or otherwise
>> problematic content served by the free apache - is that "against free
>> software?"
> Please, don't be demagogue.

It is not "demagogue" - it's a simple question that illustrates the same
issue: free software as means to access content that don't share anything
wrt to licensing or such.
>> A service is a service. It is offered as is, under whatever conditions
>> the provider likes it.
> A service or web service to follows being software. A software where
> is more easy to add restrictions, in this case those restrictions goes
> against the freedoms of the free software.

A service is a service. It might be IMPLEMENTED using software, free or not,
which is totally irrelevant for the discussion of the terms of the service.
>> Offering a convenient way to access the service using a FOSS license is
>> good style. But you aren't forced to use that, you can write your own.
>> But that doesn't change the terms and conditions of the service itself.
> Offering access via Apache 2.0 -wich is not compatible with GPLv2- to
> a non-free service is a mortal trap where people are falling.

What's that supposed to mean? Do you say that any site that is being served
by free software (under whatever license) has to do that for free? Like
ordering a 42" TV online on a apache hosted site requires them to give it
to me for free?


More information about the Python-list mailing list