Live data from Hacker News

RFC: PHP license update

wiki.php.net

1–10 of 91 posts

Re: RFC: PHP license update

#2
Dang if someone wants to become an expert in software licensing and modifications, this is a page to read.

It's sold to us as non-news, which is good. No change for contributors, no change for end users, rights wise.

Re: RFC: PHP license update

#3

Dang if someone wants to become an expert in software licensing and modifications, this is a page to read. It's sold to us as non-news, which is good. No change for contributors, no change for end users, rights wise.

Last time I heard about a non-news update that required no changes or recertification, we learned about 787MAX and MCAS.

Re: RFC: PHP license update

#5
I find these sorts of legal changes fascinating.

The fact that the OSI didn't approve of the PHP License until pressured shows the wayward nature of their "stewardship" of "open source". As does their wonky and rights-eroding definition of "open source AI".

> The proposed license does not reduce any user rights or add any new restrictions on the use of code previously licensed under the PHP License, version 3.01,

Yes, it does. Modified BSD Clause 3 (copied below).

> 3. Neither the name of the copyright holder nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

I know I'm being pedantic, but this is a narrowing of rights.

> Do We Require Permission From All Contributors? The short answer is, “No.”

I think that they can get away with this change since the original license doesn't preclude a narrowing of rights on derivatives.

It would be interesting if a contributor protested the additional burden and headache of having to deal with a torrent of snail mail asking for endorsement.

Re: RFC: PHP license update

#7
post #5

I find these sorts of legal changes fascinating. The fact that the OSI didn't approve of the PHP License until pressured shows the wayward nature of their "stewardship" of "open source". As does their wonky and rights-eroding definition of "open source AI". > The proposed license does not reduce any user rights or add any new restrictions on the use of code previously licensed under the PHP License, version 3.01, Yes…

I mean, PHP license clause 3 & 4 seems to say this already:

  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@php.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@php.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"
Edit: there may be more context than I thought

Re: RFC: PHP license update

#8

Dang if someone wants to become an expert in software licensing and modifications, this is a page to read. It's sold to us as non-news, which is good. No change for contributors, no change for end users, rights wise.

It seems like the only clauses being removed are those that protect PHP and Zend trademarks. Other than that, it's just unifying the two projects under a single license.

--

Basically, these two clauses (first from PHP, second from Zend) are removed:

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@php.net.

The names “Zend” and “Zend Engine” must not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without prior permission from Zend Technologies Ltd. For written permission, please contact license@zend.com.

And replaced with:

Neither the name of the copyright holder nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

--

Then the following three terms (4-6) are removed from PHP:

4. Products derived from this software may not be called “PHP”, nor may “PHP” appear in their name, without prior written permission from group@php.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”

5. The PHP Group may publish revised and/or new versions of the license from time to time. Each version will be given a distinguishing version number. Once covered code has been published under a particular version of the license, you may always continue to use it under the terms of that version. You may also choose to use such covered code under the terms of any subsequent version of the license published by the PHP Group. No one other than the PHP Group has the right to modify the terms applicable to covered code created under this License.

6. Redistributions of any form whatsoever must retain the following acknowledgment: “This product includes PHP software, freely available from http://www.php.net/software/”.

--

And the following three terms (4-6) are removed from Zend:

4. Zend Technologies Ltd. may publish revised and/or new versions of the license from time to time. Each version will be given a distinguishing version number. Once covered code has been published under a particular version of the license, you may always continue to use it under the terms of that version. You may also choose to use such covered code under the terms of any subsequent version of the license published by Zend Technologies Ltd. No one other than Zend Technologies Ltd. has the right to modify the terms applicable to covered code created under this License.

5. Redistributions of any form whatsoever must retain the following acknowledgment: "This product includes the Zend Engine, freely available at http://www.zend.com"

6. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgment: "The Zend Engine is freely available at http://www.zend.com"

Re: RFC: PHP license update

#9
post #7
post #5

I find these sorts of legal changes fascinating. The fact that the OSI didn't approve of the PHP License until pressured shows the wayward nature of their "stewardship" of "open source". As does their wonky and rights-eroding definition of "open source AI". > The proposed license does not reduce any user rights or add any new restrictions on the use of code previously licensed under the PHP License, version 3.01, Yes…

I mean, PHP license clause 3 & 4 seems to say this already: 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@php.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@php.net. You may indicate that your…

(I've edited my comment slightly, but not in a way that changes the context of your response.)

PHP License Clause 3 & 4 are about protecting PHP branding. Modified BSD Clause 3 is about using the software author's name or likeness as endorsement. For example, it limits putting antirez's face and name on our managed Redis product without obtaining his permission.

Re: RFC: PHP license update

#10
post #5

I find these sorts of legal changes fascinating. The fact that the OSI didn't approve of the PHP License until pressured shows the wayward nature of their "stewardship" of "open source". As does their wonky and rights-eroding definition of "open source AI". > The proposed license does not reduce any user rights or add any new restrictions on the use of code previously licensed under the PHP License, version 3.01, Yes…

IANAL, but the new license applies only to new PHP versions, changing it backwards would require approvals. If you don't contribute under new license, you should be not affected.
Post reply on HN