Re: License ok? Opinion needed.
Need a legal opinion on the following license. I assume #9 causes this to be classifiable as non-free (pity, though) -- the only other concern I had was whether #8 posed any sort of problem for our including software under this license in Debian. 1. Grant Of License. [Company name], having a principal office at [Address] (COMPANY) grants to you (LICENSEE) the non-exclusive, non-transferable, royalty free right to use, modify, reproduce and distribute [Software program] (SOFTWARE) subject to the terms set forth herein. Any d distribution of SOFTWARE shall include this License Agreement in human readable form. 2. Title to Intellectual Property and Software. Subject to the limited rights and licenses granted under this License Agreement, all rights, title and interests including patent, copyright, and trademark rights in SOFTWARE are and shall remain vested in COMPANY to the exclusion of LICENSEE. COMPANY represents and warrants that COMPANY has the legal right to grant such licenses as are expressly granted under this Agreement. 3. Copyright. The SOFTWARE is owned by COMPANY or its suppliers and is protected by United States copyright laws and international treaty provisions. Therefore, you must treat the SOFTWARE like any other copyrighted material (e.g., a book or musical recording) except that you may use the SOFTWARE as provided in this License Agreement. 4. Improvements. LICENSEE hereby grants to COMPANY a non-exclusive, non-transferable, royalty free right to use, modify, reproduce and distribute with the right to sublicense at any tier, any improvements, enhancements, extensions, or modifications that LICENSEE make to SOFTWARE, provided such are returned to COMPANY by LICENSEE. 5. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY. Because the SOFTWARE is a research work and not a released product, it is provided AS IS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND AND WITHOUT ANY SUPPORT SERVICES. EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED ABOVE IN SECTION 2, COMPANY FURTHER DISCLAIMS ALL OTHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THE SOFTWARE REMAINS WITH YOU. 6. Limitation of Liability. IN NO EVENT SHALL COMPANY OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE IN AN AMOUNT THAT EXCEEDS THE LICENSE FEE PAID BY LICENSEE FOR ANY DAMAGES (INCLUDING, WITH LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, LOSS OF BUSINESS INFORMATION, OR OTHER PECUNIARY LOSS), REGARDLESS OF THE FORM OF CLAIM OR ACTIONS, ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE THE SOFTWARE OR DOCUMENTATION, EVEN IF COMPANY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. BECAUSE SOME STATES DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, THE ABOVE LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. 7. Acknowledgement of Allocation of Risk. LICENSEE acknowledges and agrees that the fees charged by COMPANY in this Agreement reflect the allocation of risks provided by the foregoing limitation of liability. LICENSEE acknowledges and represents that it has read and understands these allocations of risk limiting the liability of COMPANY and that it understands that a modification of the allocation of risks set forth in this agreement would affect the fees charged by COMPANY, and that LICENSEE, in consideration of such fees, agrees to such allocations of risk. 8. LICENSEE INDEMNIFICATION. LICENSEE SHALL INDEMNIFY COMPANY AGAINST ALL COSTS AND DAMAGE JUDGEMENTS, INCLUDING ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS OF DEFENSE, INCURRED BECAUSE OF CLAIMS OF DAMAGE ARISING FROM LICENSEE'S POSSESSION OR USE OR INABILITY TO USE SOFTWARE. 9. GOVERNMENT RESTRICTED RIGHTS. The SOFTWARE and documentation are provided with RESTRICTED RIGHTS. Use duplication, or disclosure by the Government is subject to restrictions as set forth in subparagraph (c)(1)(ii) of The Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software clause in DFARS 252.227-7013, or subparagraphs (c)(i) and (2) of the Commercial Computer Software -- Restricted Rights at 48 CFR 52.227-19, as applicable. Manufacturer is [Company name and address]. 10. Severability. If any provision of the Agreement is held illegal or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed separable from the remaining provisions of this Agreement and shall not affect or impair the validity or enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Agreement. 11. Governing Law. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 12. Publicity. You may not use the name of COMPANY in any advertisement, press release or other publicity with reference to [Software program] without prior written consent of COMPANY. 13. Should you have any questions concerning this Agreement, or if you desire to contact Company for any reason, please do so via E-mail: [E-mail Address].
Re: License ok? Opinion needed.
On Jul 31, Mike Goldman wrote: Need a legal opinion on the following license. I assume #9 causes this to be classifiable as non-free (pity, though) -- the only other concern I had was whether #8 posed any sort of problem for our including software under this license in Debian. ... 9. GOVERNMENT RESTRICTED RIGHTS. The SOFTWARE and documentation are provided with RESTRICTED RIGHTS. Use duplication, or disclosure by the Government is subject to restrictions as set forth in subparagraph (c)(1)(ii) of The Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software clause in DFARS 252.227-7013, or subparagraphs (c)(i) and (2) of the Commercial Computer Software -- Restricted Rights at 48 CFR 52.227-19, as applicable. Manufacturer is [Company name and address]. I suspect this is boilerplate language that got included by their lawyers' build yourself a software license in 12 easy steps software :-). Having said that, the restrictions referred to are probably provisions of U.S. law rather than ones imposed by the copyright holder. I suspect the legal effect is similar to the export restrictions clauses in licenses, as it simply restates existing law (and is unenforceable outside the U.S.) rather than imposing additional restrictions on the user. Chris -- = | Chris Lawrence | Get your Debian 2.1 CD-ROMs | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |http://www.lordsutch.com/| | | | | Amiga A4000 604e/233Mhz | Visit the Amiga Web Directory | | with Linux/APUS 2.2.8 | http://www.cucug.org/amiga.html | =
Re: License ok? Opinion needed.
On Sat, Jul 31, 1999 at 01:09:47AM -0400, Mike Goldman wrote: Need a legal opinion on the following license. I assume #9 causes this to be classifiable as non-free (pity, though) -- the only other concern I had was whether #8 posed any sort of problem for our including software under this license in Debian. I only looked at paragrpahs 8 and 9 closely, someone else may have issues with other parts of the license I didn't look closely enough to see. Paragraph 8 is a no warranty, you can't sue us Nothing to fear. Paragraph 9 is US specific which is bad, though whether or not it will hurt anything I'm not immediately sure. It says government, it should say US government if it says anything. Also, I don't know about the references of law they mention---if they apply whether the license says they do or not, then it's okay. OTHERWISE, it's discriminating against the US government (or taken at its word as we traditionally do) any government. That would most definitely be discriminatory. 8. LICENSEE INDEMNIFICATION. LICENSEE SHALL INDEMNIFY COMPANY AGAINST ALL COSTS AND DAMAGE JUDGEMENTS, INCLUDING ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS OF DEFENSE, INCURRED BECAUSE OF CLAIMS OF DAMAGE ARISING FROM LICENSEE'S POSSESSION OR USE OR INABILITY TO USE SOFTWARE. 9. GOVERNMENT RESTRICTED RIGHTS. The SOFTWARE and documentation are provided with RESTRICTED RIGHTS. Use duplication, or disclosure by the Government is subject to restrictions as set forth in subparagraph (c)(1)(ii) of The Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software clause in DFARS 252.227-7013, or subparagraphs (c)(i) and (2) of the Commercial Computer Software -- Restricted Rights at 48 CFR 52.227-19, as applicable. Manufacturer is [Company name and address]. Included for reference -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux developer GnuPG: 2048g/3F9C2A43 - 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 PGP 2.6: 2048R/50BDA0ED - E8 D6 84 81 E3 A8 BB 77 8E E2 29 96 C9 44 5F BE -- Actually, the only distribution of Linux I've ever used that passed the rootshell test out of the box (hit rootshell at the time the dist is released and see if you can break the OS with scripts from there) is Debian. -- seen on the Linux security-audit mailing list pgp1m9TnQlN9p.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: License ok? Opinion needed.
To the extent that it is US specific in its discrimination, I suppose it is actually *good* -- this means it is unrestricted for use by the government of, say, Canada or France. Indeed I do not think there is any restriction against their use. FWIW, this license is for software which has not been actively developed by the original authors for some 4 years, their company has since been acquired, though others have continued work on the software. The new code is all GPL, LGPL and other non-troublesome licenses. Anyhow, I think it is likely to be difficult or impossible to renegotiate license terms with the original copyright holder. Exposing some personal bias here: I wouldn't mind it if the entire Debian distribution prohibited use by the U.S. Gov't (esp. Janet Reno Co.) -- they don't really engage in any legitimate field of endeavor after all. :) Oh well -- should this go in non-free or main, then? Joseph Carter wrote: Paragraph 9 is US specific which is bad, though whether or not it will hurt anything I'm not immediately sure. It says government, it should say US government if it says anything. Also, I don't know about the references of law they mention---if they apply whether the license says they do or not, then it's okay. OTHERWISE, it's discriminating against the US government (or taken at its word as we traditionally do) any government. That would most definitely be discriminatory. 9. GOVERNMENT RESTRICTED RIGHTS. The SOFTWARE and documentation are provided with RESTRICTED RIGHTS. Use duplication, or disclosure by the Government is subject to restrictions as set forth in subparagraph (c)(1)(ii) of The Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software clause in DFARS 252.227-7013, or subparagraphs (c)(i) and (2) of the Commercial Computer Software -- Restricted Rights at 48 CFR 52.227-19, as applicable. Manufacturer is [Company name and address].
