I was wondering if anyone else has had similar problems with their IT departments and, if so, how was it circumvented. Any advice would be appreciated! (I've tried reasoning, without success, and am reluctant to resort to physical violence
)General ⇒ Licensing issues
Licensing issues
Like many people here, I work for a university and make significant use of LaTeX in all aspects of my work. However the IT group at my university are now refusing to install LaTeX on staff machines because of licensing issues. Specifically their complaint is that while LaTeX is open source there is an item in the licence that indicates that 3rd party components may NOT be free. This is an utterly ridiculous state of affairs to me - everywhere else I have worked have been happy to use LaTeX.
I was wondering if anyone else has had similar problems with their IT departments and, if so, how was it circumvented. Any advice would be appreciated! (I've tried reasoning, without success, and am reluctant to resort to physical violence )
I was wondering if anyone else has had similar problems with their IT departments and, if so, how was it circumvented. Any advice would be appreciated! (I've tried reasoning, without success, and am reluctant to resort to physical violence
)NEW: TikZ book now 40% off at Amazon.com for a short time.
Re: Licensing issues
Just curious, what app(s) do they suggest you to use instead?
Re: Licensing issues
It's generally expected that everything is produced using Microsoft applications in our institution. My colleagues and I are understandably upset/furious about this refusal to support LaTeX and before we take this issue further, it would be nice to know if there's a workaround others have used.
Licensing issues
Where are they seeing this nonsense? It's just false. The default TeXlive installation only comes with Debian-free components. I think they even follow the FSF guidelines, which are even more restrictive.
See here:
http://tug.org/texlive/copying.html
I quote:
TeXlive has been packaged for Debian, after all, and they're pretty stringent in what they let through.
So if you install either MikTeX or TeXlive, and steer clear of ProTeXt or the CTAN snapshot, you should be fine.
I should say that TeXlive does come with scripts you can use to install some non-free stuff, but if you don't use those scripts, you don't actually have the non-free stuff installed.
The mere fact that one "could" install non-free components to use with LaTeX is no different from the fact that one "could" install plugins for MS Word that weren't covered by the Microsoft EULA. If you don't install the Third Party components, it doesn't matter what license they have.
It's absolutely reprehensible that an IT department at a University would behave in this way. How much do you want to bet that they have some exclusivity deal with Microsoft designed to "save them money" on licensing fees? Grrr. It's true. Microsoft is like an addiction.
Complain hard to the administration, and make a very definite point about what this dependency on commercial software actually costs universities in a time of financial shortfalls everywhere.
See here:
http://tug.org/texlive/copying.html
I quote:
The same is true of MikTeX.To the best of our knowledge, all the software in TeX Live meets the requirements of the Free Software Foundation's definition of free software, and the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Where the two conflict, we generally follow the FSF.
In essence, this means that all the material in TeX Live may be freely used, copied, modified, and redistributed, subject to the sources remaining freely available. (Note: this is not true of all the software in the CTAN snapshot or in proTeXt, which are distributed alongside TeX Live in the TeX Collection.)
Of course, you must not yourself claim copyright (especially with a proprietary license) on TeX Live just because you redistribute it. Again, see the copying conditions for more information.
TeXlive has been packaged for Debian, after all, and they're pretty stringent in what they let through.
So if you install either MikTeX or TeXlive, and steer clear of ProTeXt or the CTAN snapshot, you should be fine.
I should say that TeXlive does come with scripts you can use to install some non-free stuff, but if you don't use those scripts, you don't actually have the non-free stuff installed.
The mere fact that one "could" install non-free components to use with LaTeX is no different from the fact that one "could" install plugins for MS Word that weren't covered by the Microsoft EULA. If you don't install the Third Party components, it doesn't matter what license they have.
It's absolutely reprehensible that an IT department at a University would behave in this way. How much do you want to bet that they have some exclusivity deal with Microsoft designed to "save them money" on licensing fees? Grrr. It's true. Microsoft is like an addiction.
Complain hard to the administration, and make a very definite point about what this dependency on commercial software actually costs universities in a time of financial shortfalls everywhere.
Licensing issues
Exactly.frabjous wrote:...
It's absolutely reprehensible that an IT department at a University would behave in this way. How much do you want to bet that they have some exclusivity deal with Microsoft designed to "save them money" on licensing fees? Grrr. It's true. Microsoft is like an addiction[...]
So, graeme, your IT group must have some "bulk" licenses ready or maybe they're even ready to buy one and install MSO for you?
If they are ready to spill out nonsense of that kind you mentioned, I'm afraid there is no workaround possible. I guess even Richard Stallman's blessing wouldn't make things "free" enough for them
But, if sound reasoning fails (no, please do not use Force Choke on them), you may use a removable media (a USB stick or an external hard disk) with a LaTeX installation on it.
Re: Licensing issues
Thanks for all the advice. I suspect our IT department will have a problem with the opening line "To the best of our knowledge, all software in the XXXXX distribution is freely available..." since that doesn't mean it is necessarily free to copy. However my colleagues and I will try and put together an argument using your ideas to see if this mess can be resolved.
Also I understand that a ProTeXt distribution has previously been used to install LaTeX on staff (and undergraduate & postgraduate) machines. Perhaps changing to a MikTeX or TeXlive distribution will satisfy them.
As for using MikTeX on a USB stick - a great idea but I suspect one that goes against university policy about using unofficial software on university machines. But of course, how would they find out...
Also I understand that a ProTeXt distribution has previously been used to install LaTeX on staff (and undergraduate & postgraduate) machines. Perhaps changing to a MikTeX or TeXlive distribution will satisfy them.
As for using MikTeX on a USB stick - a great idea but I suspect one that goes against university policy about using unofficial software on university machines. But of course, how would they find out...
Licensing issues
When someone who sticks with FSF's definition of "Free Software" and Debian Free Software Guidelines tells you "to the best of our knowledge" that means you may be almost absolutely (~99.9%) sure it's free software and thus free to distribute. I mean, those guys who maintain TeXLive are real "zealots" (in a positive meaning, of course) when it's about licensing and principles. I remember they almost kicked couple of packages from TeXLive installation disks because documentation provided was in form of PDF files without accompanying source .tex files (I hadn't followed discussion to the end so I'm not sure how it ended). The fact alone that TeXLive is included in Debian and supported is enough of a proof it's absolutely safe to install it anywhere.graeme wrote:Thanks for all the advice. I suspect our IT department will have a problem with the opening line "To the best of our knowledge, all software in the XXXXX distribution is freely available..." since that doesn't mean it is necessarily free to copy...
Licensing issues
Both the URLs I linked to are explicitly about "copying". (Indeed, those are the page/URL titles.) They give more details too. But the LPPL is a legal document, and it's pretty clear that you can distribute it freely in unmodified form, and that you can also create derived modified works and distribute them so long as you make the changes explicit.