[Spambayes] Spam Bayes use in a corporation
bbertram at mts.net
Thu May 20 13:12:40 EDT 2004
Its all good now guys, thanks for the help. Now they are telling me its not
corporate standard software so its a no no. They don't think outside the
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Peters" <tim.one at comcast.net>
To: "'Brent Bertram'" <bbertram at mts.net>; "'Michael C. Neel'"
<neel at mediapulse.com>; "'Bertram, Brent'" <bbertram at hydro.mb.ca>
Cc: <spambayes at python.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 10:28 AM
Subject: RE: [Spambayes] Spam Bayes use in a corporation
> [Brent Bertram]
> > Just want to remind everyone that we are a corporation,
> Right, that was clear from the start.
> > our software person says being a corporation changes things.
> Is this a person you listen to often <wink>? If you need competent
> to legal questions, you need to pay lawyers.
> > What is your experience with Open Source and Corporations?
> Companies that understand Open Source are in a minority, but profit from
> Companies that use Python (which SpamBayes is coded in, and which is also
> released under the PSF license) include Google and Industrial Light &
> Hewlett-Packard ships Python on their new PCs, and Mac OS X also comes
> Python installed. Hundreds of companies use Python, none of them paid the
> PSF a penny for it (although many donate to the PSF), and none of them
> any special arrangement with the Python Software Foundation -- the PSF
> license explicitly gives them the rights to use Python, and that's the
> contract they have with the PSF. Since the PSF is the copyright holder,
> that's the only contract they need, too. The PSF license is also the only
> contract you'll have. At this point you need to read the license, and/or
> get it reviewed by corporate counsel. I advise against asking your
> "software person" more about this -- you need a "legal person" to resolve
> legal issues.
> > I think they have their mind stuck on Freeware.
> Well, something is confused here. I'm not clear on what Freeware means to
> you, or to whoever it is we're talking about indirectly here. No Open
> Source license can discriminate against corporations (read the definition
> the OSI site I pointed you at last time). All Open Source licenses allow
> anyone to use the licensed software without charge, and to modify the
> licensed software however they like for their own use; the main point on
> which they may differ is in restrictions imposed on distributing derived
> works. In a nutshell, the GPL requires that derived works be distributed
> under a license "similar to" the GPL; the PSF license does not; but this
> distinction is irrelevant to you unless you intend to distribute derived
More information about the Spambayes