Is Rust non-free?

9 replies [Last post]
chaosmonk

I am a member!

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 07/07/2017

Continued from: https://trisquel.info/en/forum/virtual-machine-use-brave-epic-tor-browsers#comment-142904

> Hmm? Python has similiar restrictions? Can I see the link?

The link is in my previous comment. I found the link in one of the pages that *you* linked to. Did you read it through all the way? :)

> EDIT: One of the devs whose operating system I use seems to think Rust is non-free. due to that trademark issue...

Can you link to where they said this? I also use Hyperbola on some of my machines and did notice that Rust is missing. The only mention of Rust I found on the wiki is on this page:[1]

"UXP is known for removing bloatware. As such, you will spend a fair amount of time removing bloat from your application which is no longer supported by UXP.
...
"There is no support for Rust. If your application has Rust dependencies (MOZ_RUST_URLPARSE), they must be removed. This gets a little more complex, so it helps to spend some time going through commits that your application made during the transition to Rust and revert them. In our case, we were lucky to find the initial rust commit and revert it."

So it sounds like the Hyperbola devs consider Rust to be bloatware, in which case it makes sense that they would want to exclude it from their own software like Iceweasel-UXP and Icedove-UXP. However, it's not a freedom issue, so it doesn't explain why it is excluded from the distro and conflicts with the "your-freedom" package, so I wondered if there might be some additional issues with Rust.

However, if the trademark restrictions are the only other issue, that also does not seem like a reason to exclude it from the distro. They can either (a) Package it without modifications under the name "Rust," just as they are allowed to package Python without modifications under the name "Python," or (b) change the name to something else, and they can modify it without running into trademark restrictions, just as they can modify Basilisk without running into its trademark restrictions[2] because they changed the name to "Iceweasel-UXP."

> Maybe Icecat and Abrowser and Tor Browser are just non-free in the free culture sense?

Do they have any non-free artwork? I'm not aware of any.

[1] https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:project:icedove-uxp

[2] https://github.com/MoonchildProductions/UXP

Dmitry Alexandrov
Offline
Joined: 03/07/2019

name at domain wrote to CalmStorm:
>> Hmm? Python has similiar restrictions? Can I see the link?
>
> The link [https://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/] is in my previous comment. I found the link in one of the pages that *you* linked to. Did you read it through all the way? :)

I did, and it does not seem to have any obnoxious requirements. That’s unlike the Rust®’s one — as well as ones for other Mozilla’s pseudo-free software, which varies from being unmodifiable to being nonredistibutable (Firefox®).

> if the trademark restrictions are the only other issue, that also does not seem like a reason to exclude it from the distro. They can either (a) Package it without modifications under the name "Rust," just as they are allowed to package Python without modifications under the name "Python,"

If they are allowed to package Python without modifications only, that would render ‘Python’ nonfree, so the only option would be to drop restrictions by renaming. That is not the case, though.

chaosmonk

I am a member!

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 07/07/2017

> I did, and it does not seem to have any obnoxious requirements.
> That’s unlike the Rust®’s one — as well as ones for other Mozilla’s
> pseudo-free software, which varies from being unmodifiable to being
> nonredistibutable (Firefox®).
>
> > if the trademark restrictions are the only other issue, that also
> > does not seem like a reason to exclude it from the distro. They can
> > either (a) Package it without modifications under the name "Rust,"
> > just as they are allowed to package Python without modifications
> > under the name "Python,"
>
> If they are allowed to package Python without modifications only, that
> would render ‘Python’ nonfree, so the only option would be to drop
> restrictions by renaming. That is not the case, though.

You're right. The Python restrictions seem to apply mainly to commercial
uses of the trademark, not uses of the trademark for modified versions
of Python. Rust's trademark policies are indeed more restrictive, so my
comment about modifications was inaccurate. The point I was trying to
make though is that all trademark restrictions can be avoided by
rebranding, so a non-free trademark does not make the software itself
non-free, as long as you can modify and redistribute the software
without the trademark. (If the developer intentionally makes the
trademark difficult to remove in order to discourage modifications,
that's another story.)

Magic Banana

I am a member!

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 07/24/2010

That’s unlike the Rust®’s one — as well as ones for other Mozilla’s pseudo-free software, which varies from being unmodifiable to being nonredistibutable (Firefox®).

I read https://www.rust-lang.org/policies/media-guide

Have you?

Although I am not a lawyer, my understanding is that:

  • there is no restriction on distributing exact copies of Rust;
  • redistributing modified copies requires changing the name and logo or getting the permission from the Rust core team to keep the name/logo.

The latter restriction is OK. It is not exagerated to ask whoever modifies Rust to modify as well the branding. And, more fundamentally, it is the whole point of trademarks: helping the consumer (the user, here) know what she is getting. Sites proposing the download of modified versions (typically with the addition of adware or malware) of popular free software (like Firefox and LibreOffice) are a real problem. Such trademark policies tackle that problem.

And if Rust is "bloated", then so are all interpreted languages (Python, Ruby, Perl, etc.) and all languages using bytecode (like Java and all languages using the JVM). Rust is a compiled language. It efficiently manages the resources, including CPU time and memory.

Dmitry Alexandrov
Offline
Joined: 03/07/2019

In a message [0] I did not receive and therefore cannot reply properly name at domain wrote:
>> I tried to install the 3 browsers below:
>> www.brave.com
>
> Brave is free software

How ‘Brave Browser’ is free software? Here is [1] its copyright licence:

| * Brave Browser License
|
| The executable code version of the Brave browser is made available under the terms set forth below. Source code for parts of the Brave browser may be available for use under open source licenses and accessible via https://github.com/brave. Nothing in this Agreement will be construed to limit any rights granted under such open source licenses with respect to code specifically covered by such licenses.
|
| Subject to the terms hereof, Brave grants you a personal, non-exclusive license to install and use the executable code version of the Brave browser. Brave and its licensors shall retain all intellectual property rights in the Brave browser (and Service), except for the rights expressly granted in this Agreement. You may not remove or alter any trademark, or logo (collectively, “Marks”), copyright or other proprietary notice on the Brave browser. This license does not grant you any right to use Marks of Brave or its licensors. If you breach this Agreement, the above license and your right to use the Brave browser will terminate immediately and without notice. Upon termination, you must destroy all copies of the Brave browser.

I does not grant any essential freedom, except the zeroth one — to use. And even that is revocable.

[0] https://trisquel.info/en/forum/virtual-machine-use-brave-epic-tor-browsers#comment-142891
[1] https://brave.com/terms-of-use/

chaosmonk

I am a member!

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 07/07/2017

On 08/26, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> > Brave is free software
>
> How ‘Brave Browser’ is free software? Here is [1] its copyright licence:
>
> | * Brave Browser License
> |
> | The executable code version of the Brave browser is made available under the terms set forth below. Source code for parts of the Brave browser may be available for use under open source licenses and accessible via https://github.com/brave. Nothing in this Agreement will be construed to limit any rights granted under such open source licenses with respect to code specifically covered by such licenses.
> |
> | Subject to the terms hereof, Brave grants you a personal, non-exclusive license to install and use the executable code version of the Brave browser. Brave and its licensors shall retain all intellectual property rights in the Brave browser (and Service), except for the rights expressly granted in this Agreement. You may not remove or alter any trademark, or logo (collectively, “Marks”), copyright or other proprietary notice on the Brave browser. This license does not grant you any right to use Marks of Brave or its licensors. If you breach this Agreement, the above license and your right to use the Brave browser will terminate immediately and without notice. Upon termination, you must destroy all copies of the Brave browser.
>
> I does not grant any essential freedom, except the zeroth one — to use. And even that is revocable.

I was looking at the source code, which is under a free license.[1] I
did not realize that they distribute their binaries under a different
license from their source code. You're right, the executable they
distribute is non-free.

[1] https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/blob/master/LICENSE

jxself
Offline
Joined: 09/13/2010

"Is Rust non-free?"

Yes. The page at https://www.rust-lang.org/policies/media-guide says it merely supplements the official Mozilla trademark policy; it does not not replace it. Since Mozilla's trademark policy applies (as it does to everything on https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/trademarks/list/) then everything in that list (including Rust) pulls in the same issue as with e.g. Firefox and Freedom #2 (redistribution of exact copies commerically.)

Magic Banana

I am a member!

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 07/24/2010

I should have paid more attention reading https://www.rust-lang.org/policies/media-guide : you are right. I am in favor of "ALanguage". :-)

chaosmonk

I am a member!

I am a translator!

Offline
Joined: 07/07/2017

> I wonder what can be done then.

The same thing we do with Firefox: rename it so that Mozilla's trademark policies do not apply.

jxself
Offline
Joined: 09/13/2010

In Trisquel we have "A Browser." Perhaps this could be "A Language" :)