[sword-devel] Legitimate FTP Mirrors & Module Distribution Rights Question

Andrew Thule thulester at gmail.com
Wed Jul 25 10:29:36 MST 2012

Greg, thanks for your response

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Greg Hellings <greg.hellings at gmail.com> wrote:

> I has, since at least the time I started with SWORD in 2004, always
> supported multiple install locations. The only difficulty I'm aware of
> comes with automatic updating if module ABC exists in Repository 1 and
> Repository 2 - currently InstallMgr has no way of knowing which one is
> the source of the currently installed ABC and thus it cannot determine
> from which source an update should be pulled. But it has always
> supported including multiple sources.

How is this the responsibility of InstallMgr?  If Module ABC exists in
two (or more) repositories, and Crosswire has permitted repositories
on the grounds that they be reflective of the main site, does it
matter if InstallMgr gets the module from site X vs site Y?  As far as
IntallMgr is concerned if the module was obtained from Site X it will
always seek updates from Site X.

If the user tries to install from Site Y, InstallMgr should be smart
enough to reinstall from Site Y (you can currently reinstall modules
from the same site), but then associate that module with Site Y,
removing its record in Site X.  The module should always be associated
with the site it was download from (last), should it not?  Likewise it
should always look for updates from the same source subject to be

> None of the modules I am aware of specify the particular manner in
> which Crosswire must or must not distribute the module. There are
> some, I believe, which limit to only Sword format which we try to
> avoid now as that prevents the creation of GoBible installers for the
> text and so on. However, there are none that currently specify "from
> only the primary www.crosswire.org server" or such.

This is good news (not as good as the Good News Christ gave us, but
good nonetheless.

> I would imagine Crosswire would do so if the issue ever arises that
> the server becomes unreliable (such as happened for a brief time this
> past Spring) or if the bandwidth requirements for modules alone became
> more than the current host provides. However, there are no such plans
> at the moment that have been discussed openly, thus it is safe to
> assume that there are no such plans at present.

I offer to host a mirror (freely) should Crosswire ever decide to do
this. (I currently own a company that hosts other very high bandwidth,
high-availablity sties (sites such as bash.org) so this isn't an idle

> So long as the license requirements are fulfilled, there is nothing
> preventing redistribution. As I recall, the initial reaction to your
> announcement was not that you must take it down but that you must
> filter those modules which are licensed for only Crosswire's
> distribution. Any modules which are in the Public Domain or which have
> licenses that do not restrict their distribution to e.g. CrossWire
> only, you are free to mirror. However, you would have to manually
> create such a list by inspecting each module's license individually by
> hand.

So mirrors authorized by Crosswire do not qualify as distributed by
Crosswire under 'CrossWire only'? Does that not say that Crosswire
will never distribute 'Crosswire only' modules from any place other
than one central site - unless it develops a process for authorizing
'official mirrors'.  If Crosswire specifically has some process which
grants and revokes official status as a mirror, could that then
redistribute these modules?

> The rights are clearly stated in each module within the official
> CrossWire repositories. Other repositories have their own methods and
> requirements and may or may not include license information. The
> license is there for you to observe and follow for each official CW
> module that you care to mirror. We only ask that you honor the license
> itself within the laws of where you live and host your mirror/cache.
> We also ask, as a project, that you honor the intent of the module
> owner. If the laws where the publisher lives are different from the
> laws where you plan to host the site, we would ask you honor what the
> publisher requires, even if there is no legal way to enforce that
> across international boundaries. We ask this because many of these
> modules are licensed for CrossWire to distribute with the good grace
> of the publisher/translator. None of us and few of them are lawyers,
> so licensing might not be water-tight and iron clad. If we give a
> good-faith attempt to follow intentions instead of the letter of what
> is written then we are more likely to garner good will from future
> publishers and content creators.
> --Greg



More information about the sword-devel mailing list