Fri Mar 18 04:11:25 UTC 2005
> From: Bernard Gardner > I'm quite interested in this question, as the operator of a private > network which sells floods. We also operate one of the public servers > as our contribution to the cause. We don't currently flood from our > private trap network into the public network - if we did so, would this > satisfy that portion of the license? It sounds likely. > I can't see any technical downside > to this from our perspective, the value in our database is the lack of > false positives, and a one way flood into the public network wouldn't > change that (I don't think it would make much difference to the public > network either, but we're happy to do it if required to satisfy the > license). Since your public server is the only one in your part of the world, much outrage about not flooding all of your checksums seems unlikely. > We're also an entity which sells anti-spam solutions to others (based > on a combination of DCC and proprietary detection algorithms), so I > assume we're still not covered by the new license. Will there be an > option to purchase a commercial license for the software which allows > resale of data feeds and incorporation into other products? Can you > provide a contact person for this? I know nothing about the Commtouch sales organization. According to my agreement with Commtouch, http://www.commtouch.com/ is supposed to be helpful. I think people at Commtouch are watching this mailing list, so perhaps someone will contact you. OOPS! That made me realize just now that I stopped copying from the agreement into the new LICENSE file prematurely. A corrected version of the file is attached. > Do you forsee any issue if we choose to branch from one of the free > releases and continue development (as allowed by the license on that > version of the code)? Only what I said before: 4. maintain their own versions based on the old code, i.e. a "code fork." I hope that there will not be a public code fork, because the organizations have motives for forking generally have lots of proprietary code. Some are uncomfortable with any sharing code. And there's the patent. Some organizations have been essentially that for years. I suspect the fuzzy checksums in their old versions are less effective today. Vernon Schryver firstname.lastname@example.org * Distributed Checksum Clearinghouse * * Copyright (c) 2005 by Rhyolite Software * * This agreement is not applicable to any entity which sells anti-spam * solutions to others or provides an anti-spam solution as part of a * security solution sold to other entities, or to a private network * which employes DCC or uses data provided by operation of DCC but does * not provide corresponding data to other users. * * Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any * purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above * copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies. * * Parties not eligible to receive a license under this agreement can * obtain a commercial license to use DCC and permission to use * U.S. Patent 6,330,590 by contacting Commtouch at www.commtouch.com. * * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND RHYOLITE SOFTWARE DISCLAIMS ALL * WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES * OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL RHYOLITE SOFTWARE * BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES * OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, * WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, * ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS * SOFTWARE.
More information about the DCC