[toyg]

I applaud Qualcomm for donating all trademarks and copyrights too, which means literally anyone can recompile it and still call it "Eudora".

Unfortunately Eudora is basically three completely different codebases (Windows, Mac, and a rebranded Thunderbird for Linux). I guess only the Windows one is likely to ever be revived.

[kps]

“The license does NOT allow you to use any of the trademarks or domain names related to Eudora, including Eudora™, www.eudora.com, and www.eudora.org.” — http://www.computerhistory.org/_static/atchm/the-eudora-emai...

[toyg]

It's a bit weird, just above they say "they decided not to simply grant a license, but to transfer ownership of the code, the Eudora trademarks, the copyrights, and the Eudora domain names to the Computer History Museum".

So it's the CHM who is barring people from using the name. The relevant clause must be this: "Neither the name of Computer History Museum nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission." Is this really "BSD license", if the name is off-limits? This looks like an extra clause to me. Honest question.

EDIT: also, that clause mentions the names of contributors, not of the actual software. So they would have to argue that Eudora is barred by "contributor Eudora Inc." -- does that company even exist anymore?

[kps]

Trademark ≠ copyright. My reading is: (1) CHM now owns the code, and CHM is licensing it under a BSD license. (2) CHM now owns the trademarks, and is not licensing them.

[djsumdog]

You can protect the name and code differently. Firefox holds certain trademarks and only binaries they compile can be distributed with their branding.

You can have Firefox branding if you compile it yourself, but you can't distribute the binaries (Gentoo has a notice about this in the build process). This is why Debian created the IceWeasel package.

The museum might want to preserve the name associated with that piece of history, so Eudora always points to that final release. If the license for the code is BSD, people can of course publish their own ports with new names.

[jcranmer]

> Is this really "BSD license", if the name is off-limits? This looks like an extra clause to me.

There's actually a few licenses that are called the BSD license. In modern terms, BSD refers to the 3-clause BSD.

However, the 3-clause BSD was not the original form. It was introduced because the 4th clause was generally viewed as problematic. That 4th clause is:

> 4. Neither the name of the <organization> nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

This "weird" clause is actually the 4th clause of the 4-clause BSD. It's weird because it's extremely uncommon, but it is part of a major BSD license.

[kps]

That clause is in the common 3-clause version. The dropped clause from 4 to 3 is the one that was originally #3,

3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement: This product includes software developed by the <organization>.

[hsivonen]

The all caps part has an extra sentence, too.

[hinkley]

Project Neudora on github in 5, 4, 3, 2...

[kps]

Note that the CHM survey has a place to express interest in further developing Eudora.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/eudora-poll1

[squarefoot]

I'd love GNUdora, but probably not doable due to license clashes.

[icc97]

The difference in code bases is striking [0]:

> The Windows version of Eudora is written in C++. The source tree consists of 8,651 files in 565 folders, taking up 458 MB. There are both production (“Eudora71”) and test (“Sandbox”) versions of the code.

> The Macintosh version of Eudora is an entirely different code base and is written in C. The source tree consists of 1,433 files in 47 folders, taking up 69.9 MB.

[0]: http://www.computerhistory.org/_static/atchm/the-eudora-emai...

[joshuas]

Back then you didn't have a lot of choice of what language to use, windows was MFC on visual studio and Mac was codewarrior(I think). The Mac and Windows versions were written by two separate teams even though we sat next to each other, and I can't think of any code shared between them, anything we could have shared would have been trivial to write from scratch. I have no explanation for the enormous size of the Mac version.

[chx]

I'll be damned. Joshua Stephens for real? I know your name from the Eudora Extended Message Services API docs -- though that was long ago. There were like four names there. How much of that was your work :) ?

[icc97]

Very interesting. Were you implementing to a spec with the Windows version, or was it simply just 'make the Windows version do what the Mac version does'?