SnapLogic Blog

Lots of chatter around the blogosphere today about the Chrome End User License Agreement (EULA).  Good reason to be concerned about intimidating, privacy-challenged language like this:

“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. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services.”

Or, this:

“The software which you use may automatically download and install updates from time to time from Google. These updates are designed to improve, enhance and further develop the services and may take the form of bug fixes, enhanced functions, new software modules and completely new versions. You agree to receive such updates (and permit Google to deliver these to you) as part of your use of the services.”

Google has since backed off and is claiming that this was all a big mistake.  Which is nice, but in reality there wasn’t any reason to get all tied up in knots over this.

Chrome is all open source.  You can download the source right here.

If you don’t like the license, grab the source compile it and use it unrestricted. Distribute binaries if you like.

I’m not surprised that there are still lot of people that don’t fully understand open source. Although I was a little surprised that Matt didn’t mention this….

I read that Google will be providing all their Android software under an Apache license. Ed Burnette at ZDnet says:

With Android, carriers like Sprint and Cingular are free to use either open or closed source for any custom applications they install on their new Android phones. And of course, third party programs (like the ones [...]

Interesting thread over at Java Posse about the irony of how the GPL has somehow been co-opted by SpringSource to achieve their business objectives.
This should come as no surprise to anyone that’s familiar with the FSF and the GPL. They’ve never been against capitalism (in spite of some people’s view of Richard Stallman). [...]

At ThinkTank this week there was a CIO panel where they discussed things that Open Source solution providers could do to simplify procurement. A big hurdle to Open Source adoption continues to be license proliferation.
I had thought that this hubbub had died down with the release of GPLv3 and the adoption of the CPAL [...]

Saw the news today that the SFLC has filed suit against Verizon on behalf of its client BusyBox.
Its interesting that for years the SFLC never once filed suit trying to enforce the GPL, yet in a matter of three months has filed suit (on behalf of the same client, BusyBox) against Monsoon Multimedia, High Gain [...]