Is HTTP / WWW a freely accessible distribution system?

[bradrydzewski]

Hi Kyle, I have been wondering about this line:

through a freely accessible distribution system widely used for similar software, so others can find and copy it

Would posting my code to a website, similar to how Apple [1] posts their code, satisfy this requirement since HTTP / WWW is a free distribution system widely used to distribute most software? Would it be reasonable to make this more specific to encourage people to post to GitHub, GitLab, etc?

-through a freely accessible distribution system widely used [...]
+through a freely accessible source code management service widely used [...]

[1] https://opensource.apple.com/

[kemitchell]

I think Apple could argue very strongly that the World Wide Web meets Parity's criteria.

The part of Parity that you quoted is trying to balance future-proofing and practical effect. If the license lets folks post code wherever, they could choose to "hide" their code in obscure places. If it required them to post through a specific service, the license becomes tied to that service, and becomes useless once that service is no longer tops.

I am also a bit worried about reinforcing "winner take all" dynamics in code hosting. It's not the case that GitHub is the only game, but they're the runaway winner, for now. Not everyone is willing to use their service, or to agree to their terms.

I think there are probably some approaches that could help the situation. For example, in the Temerity license we've been hacking on:

Provide contributors and others to whom you make the software available directions to find the work you published and notice of the terms for it, such as by including notice of a distribution system address with copies of the software, changing the software to give users notice of an address, or answering inquiries from users whose data is processed.

If there's sufficient ambiguity about where the licensee has to publish their code, this kind of language requires they to resolve it.