SB Unusable in Production Due to License Issues

Found an issue in SpiderBasic ? Please report it here !
User avatar
Tristano
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2020 12:24 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

SB Unusable in Production Due to License Issues

Post by Tristano »

As of SpiderBasic v2.31 there's a serious problem with the licenses file, which is basically just the PureBasic licenses file pasted into SB's documentation.
Compare:
They are one and the same, and I strongly doubt that SB applications use OGRE, Scintilla or PCRE, etc.

This is a serious problem affecting use of SB in production — how can we possibly distribute an application (free or commercial) if the third party components' licenses are wrong? In the worst case, we're not crediting the true third party components used by SB, in all cases we'd be citing components which are not part of our application, both being legally problematic, especially if dealing with a commercial software being marketed.

Now I'm not even sure if SB uses third party components at all (but I guess yes, since the Licenses page was included in the Help file, even if only as a placeholder). Peeking at sources in the installation folder, I can't see any mentions of third party components in the JS code, nor any license files floating around.

Whatever the case, the problem needs to be fixed ASAP in the Help file, for it's currently misleading — especially to end users who don't use PureBasic, for they might not even notice the incongruency.

The problem was first pointed out by @Sicro, in 2018, on the PureBasic Forum:
I joined that thread too, in 2020, immediately after purchasing my license. But is seems that the post went unnoticed.

See also my recent post on this forum:
16bit
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:55 pm

Re: SB Unusable in Production Due to License Issues

Post by 16bit »

Polite bump :-)

SpiderBasic is an interesting option, but this is currently a blocker, for me.

I realize I can probably traverse the libraries/javascript folder and start figuring things out from there, but that's not ideal. For some libs like Dojo it's fairly easy to research and I presume these licenses are applicable, but for other libs like sql.min.js I'm less sure...is this a creation of the SpiderBasic team, or is it a FOSS solution? I don't know, and so having accurate licensing information is definitely important.
16bit
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:55 pm

Re: SB Unusable in Production Due to License Issues

Post by 16bit »

So... guess we're out of luck :cry:
Fred
Site Admin
Posts: 1327
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 10:51 am

Re: SB Unusable in Production Due to License Issues

Post by Fred »

I will take a closer look to it and update this file, sorry for the delay.
16bit
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:55 pm

Re: SB Unusable in Production Due to License Issues

Post by 16bit »

Thank you!
User avatar
Tristano
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2020 12:24 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: SB Unusable in Production Due to License Issues

Post by Tristano »

This thread is developing slowly, but developing nonetheless (I'm not sure why I'm not getting automatically notified when the thread is updated, I'll have to check the settings.)
16bit wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 11:18 pm I realize I can probably traverse the libraries/javascript folder and start figuring things out from there, but that's not ideal. For some libs like Dojo it's fairly easy to research and I presume these licenses are applicable, but for other libs like sql.min.js I'm less sure...is this a creation of the SpiderBasic team, or is it a FOSS solution?
So, Dojo is a FOSS component found in SpiderBasic built-in libraries? yet I don't see it mentioned in the SpiderBasic Application license. That's problematic indeed, because publishing an application that makes use of third party components without honoring their license basically put you (the author) in a situation where you loose all rights to use those components henceforth (unless legal amendment step are taken).

Also, as you mentioned, we have no way to know how many components are involved in the whole library, and their authors and licenses.

Indeed, this a worrying situation, and the risk of the consequences are just not worth using SB in production work — even for free and open source projects, for the licenses conditions still apply in the same measure.

I would have personally considered this issue the number one issue among all current issues, because of its far reaching implications on SB usability, and the potential legal outcomes it entails.
16bit
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:55 pm

Re: SB Unusable in Production Due to License Issues

Post by 16bit »

Tristano wrote: Tue Jul 06, 2021 1:59 pmeven for free and open source projects
Indeed...and, we would want to avoid proprietary code or even FOSS code that is licensed in an incompatible way (in the sense of two or more FOSS libraries having licenses that are mutually incompatible, or one or more FOSS libraries using a license that is incompatible with that of the project itself).

I guess it all amounts to the same thing: it's important we know what components are used and how they are licensed.
Post Reply