PalmOS SDK license
Package: prc-tools
Severity: grave
Version: 0.5.0r-3.1
[cc'ed to debian-legal]
Hi,
I've just been looking at the license for the PalmOS SDK, and I have a
feeling that we may not be able to distribute the SDK with the prc-tools
package. Even if we are, the license is not currently included in the
copyright file, which it needs to be.
Full text of the license is enclosed below.
-- begin included file --
IMPORTANT: Read Before Using The Accompanying Software
3COM PALM OS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT KIT
SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT
YOU SHOULD CAREFULLY READ THE FOLLOWING TERMS AND
CONDITIONS BEFORE USING THE ACCOMPANYING SOFTWARE,
THE USE OF WHICH IS LICENSED BY PALM COMPUTING, INC., A
SUBSIDIARY OF 3COM CORPORATION (COLLECTIVELY, "3COM"),
TO ITS CUSTOMERS FOR THEIR USE ONLY AS SET FORTH
BELOW. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT, DO NOT USE THE
SOFTWARE. USING ANY PART OF THE SOFTWARE INDICATES
THAT YOU ACCEPT THESE TERMS.
LICENSE: 3Com grants you a nonexclusive, royalty-free license to use the
accompanying software program(s) (the "Software") subject to the terms and
restrictions set forth in this License Agreement. Except as explicitly set
forth
below, (i) you are not permitted to lease or rent (except under separate
mutually
agreeable terms set forth in writing and signed by both parties), distribute or
sublicense the Software or to use the Software in a time-sharing arrangement or
in any other unauthorized manner; (ii) no license is granted to you in the
human
readable code of the Software (source code); and (iii) this License Agreement
does not grant you any rights to patents, copyrights, trade secrets,
trademarks, or
any other rights in respect to the Software.
The Software is licensed to be used on any personal computer and/or any Palm
Computing platform product, provided that the Software is used only in
connection with your development of products for use with Palm Computing
platform products. The Software contains certain sample source code in the
form of example applications (including several conduits) and code fragments
(both in the source code files and documentation provided hereunder), and may
include a tutorial application (collectively, "Sample Source Code"). You may
use the Sample Source Code internally to develop products for Palm Computing
platform products. You may distribute any such products built with the Sample
Source Code, provided that you include the following copyright notice within
your source code and in the location of your own copyright notice: "Portions
copyright c 1998 3Com Corporation or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved."
Notwithstanding anything else in this License Agreement, you may not distribute
the conduit development kit header files included as part of the Software to
anyone for any reason.
Except as described above, the Software and supporting documentation may be
copied only as essential for backup or archive purposes in support of your use
of
the Software as permitted hereunder. You must reproduce and include all
copyright notices and any other proprietary rights notices appearing on the
Software on any copies that you make.
NO ASSIGNMENT; NO REVERSE ENGINEERING: You may transfer the
Software and this License Agreement to another party if the other party agrees
in
writing to accept the terms and conditions of this License Agreement. If you
transfer the Software, you must at the same time either transfer all copies of
the
Software as well as the supporting documentation to the same party or destroy
any such materials not transferred. Except as set forth above, you may not
transfer or assign the Software or your rights under this License Agreement.
Modification, reverse engineering, reverse compiling, or disassembly of the
Software is expressly prohibited. However, if you are a European Community
("EC") resident, information necessary to achieve interoperability of the
Software with other programs within the meaning of the EC Directive on the
Legal Protection of Computer Programs is available to you from 3Com upon
written request.
EXPORT RESTRICTIONS: You agree that you will not export or re-export
the Software or accompanying documentation (or any copies thereof) or any
products utilizing the Software or such documentation in violation of any
applicable laws or regulations of the United States or the country in which you
obtained them.
TRADE SECRETS; TITLE: You acknowledge and agree that the structure,
sequence and organization of the Software are the valuable trade secrets of
3Com and its suppliers. You agree to hold such trade secrets in confidence.
You further acknowledge and agree that ownership of, and title to, the Software
and all subsequent copies thereof regardless of the form or media are held by
3Com and its suppliers.
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT LEGEND: The Software is commercial
in nature and developed solely at privat
Re: PalmOS SDK license
Scripsit Chris Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Package: prc-tools > Severity: grave > Version: 0.5.0r-3.1 EVERYBODY BEWARE! The original message was posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with cc to debian-legal. People who just use "wide reply" to follow up to debian-legal postings run a grave risk of inadvertently submitting a separate bug! The *right* way to do this would be to used the X-Debbugs-CC header to have the bug tracking system send debian-legal a copy of the message with the right bug number etc. See the user manual for the bug tracking system. > I've just been looking at the license for the PalmOS SDK, and I have a > feeling that we may not be able to distribute the SDK with the prc-tools > package. We surely cannot outside nonfree, and even in nonfree is doubtful as the license seems to disallow independent distribution on FTP servers: > (ii) no license is granted to you in the human > readable code of the Software (source code); Fails DFSG #2. > NO ASSIGNMENT; NO REVERSE ENGINEERING: You may transfer the > Software and this License Agreement to another party if the > other party agrees in writing to accept the terms and > conditions of this License Agreement. Fails DFSG #1, #7. > Modification, reverse engineering, reverse compiling, or disassembly of the > Software is expressly prohibited. Fails DFSG #3. > TRADE SECRETS; TITLE: You acknowledge and agree that the structure, > sequence and organization of the Software are the valuable trade secrets of > 3Com and its suppliers. You agree to hold such trade secrets in > confidence. Ought to fail DFSG on some count, perhaps #1 (under any sensible interpretaion redistribution would entail breach of said confidence)? -- Henning Makholm "... popping pussies into pies Wouldn't do in my shop just the thought of it's enough to make you sick and I'm telling you them pussy cats is quick ..."
ldraw.org parts library (again)
For those who remember my old questions, no, it has not been resolved. Ldraw.org coordinates and puts together a parts library (of lego style pieces) which they distribute from their site. The library is a self extracting exe which contains individual parts files in some 3d format or another (no, I really don't know what format). These pieces are used by various programs to put together into lego models (leocad in my case http://www.leocad.org). There are several issues that I don't understand. 1) Is this parts library copyrightable? It is simply descriptions of physical things that anyone can see and measure; it is discovered data. I've attached an email about this from the mailing lists at ldraw. 2) Let's say it is copyrightable and has some license or other on it. I make a model (using the parts library) and publish it in 3d format. What is the relationship between my model and the original library? Is it considered a derivative work? If enough 3d, finished models were gathered up, one could theoretically extract the pieces and recreate the original parts library, circumventing any license on the original library. 3) I've attached a few other emails that I hope convey an idea of what ldraw people want in a license. Are there any examples similar to this one? Does anyone have any suggestions on a possible resolution? Thanks. -- Pat Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If puns were deli meat, this would be the wurst. In lugnet.cad.dev, Fredrik Glöckner wrote: >"Pat Mahoney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> It could probably be argued that since the parts represent physical >> things, they [the data in the library] are just "discovered" >> measurements of empirical data. They are not "created" and therefore >> not copyrightable. > >This is true, however the creation of parts is not merely a mechanical >process -- the author does actually go through a creative process to >model a part. This is because the author has to choose which details >to model and which primitives to use. This is a good point, and I agree with it. I don't know if it has anything to do with copyright or not. >So I would say that most LDrawn parts, except the most basic ones, are >indeed copyrightable. As I understand it (and IANAL), 'copyright' applies to the expression of ideas. So you can hold copyright on a file, which prevents others from duplicating that file (with various allowances and restrictions). But they are free to use the ideas expressed in that file. When it comes down to it, the LEGO Company holds the IP rights to all these measurements and patterns and ideas. We part authors have *no* right to any of these numbers. We can and do have copyright on their expression, in the part files we create. Steve I have some issues, mostly minor, one major. In lugnet.cad.dev, Leonardo Zide writes: > Hi, > > After some more dicussion, I have come to the following proposal for >the license. It's much simpler than Steve's first license but I think it >covers all important points. > > I have also copied some parts of the GPL text because I think they are >useful. > >== > >Section I: Definitions > >"Owner" is the Software's copyright owner. Which is who? This needs to be addressed somewhere. > >"Unaltered Version" is an exact duplicate of the Library as provided by >the >Owner. If you add to, delete, or change any files in the Software >package, >or if you add files to the Software, it is no longer an Unaltered >Version. >Straight conversions from the original ASCII format to a binary format >is >not considered an "Altered Version", provided that the contents of the >library >is not modified in any way. > >"Altered Version" is a copy of the Library that has been modified by >someone >other than the Owner. > >LCAD: LEGO-style CAD. In reference to the system of construction toys >produced by The LEGO Company. Minor issue: strike ".", add "and the various programs and systems of datamodels that allow Computer Aided Design (creation) of representations and renderings thereof." or something to that effect, or else the definition is incomplete. Some reference to the Library being based on LDraw standards may be helpful. >Library: the set of DAT files, distributed by ldraw.org, and labeled as >the 'LCAD Parts Library'. Minor point: What is a DAT file? Can the library contain anything other than DAT files? Should you claim that anything that is originated by ldraw.org is covered? what is the difference between originated by and distributed by? These points were covered in other, more verbose but more precise, versions of the proposed license. >Redistribute: Making the Library available from a source other than the >www.ldraw.org internet website. > > >Section II: Requirements > >1. The origin of this library must not be misrepresented; you must not > claim that you wrote the original l
eCos License Overview
I consider packaging ecos. Please look at the license here: http://sources.redhat.com/ecos/license-overview.html I think it qualifies as free. But there is some fishy thing that changes made to the system must be announced. Please comment! Since I am not on this list, please Cc: me.
Re: ldraw.org parts library (again)
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 03:58:42PM -0600, Pat Mahoney wrote: > For those who remember my old questions, no, it has not been resolved. > > Ldraw.org coordinates and puts together a parts library (of lego style > pieces) which they distribute from their site. The library is a self > extracting exe which contains individual parts files in some 3d format > or another (no, I really don't know what format). These pieces are > used by various programs to put together into lego models (leocad in my > case http://www.leocad.org). > > There are several issues that I don't understand. > > 1) Is this parts library copyrightable? It is simply descriptions of > physical things that anyone can see and measure; it is discovered > data. I've attached an email about this from the mailing lists at > ldraw. > No. Copyright restrictions apply only for creative works. Facts (like a lego brick is 1" long by .5" tall by .5" deep) are not covered by copyright. One might agrue that a lego brick is like a sculpture, and thus a creative work restricted under copyright. However, that argument is flawed. A lego brick very much like a masonary brick, and as such has a similar copyright status. I also recall lego kits including parts such as gears, axles, and motors. Mechanical drawings made of these items through disassembly and measurement are no more restricted under copyright than models of the respective parts in an automobile made through a similar process. Companies can (and do) disassemble automobiles and take measurements in order to publish books that include drawings and dimensions of these parts in order to aid in the repair and rebuilding of automobiles. Inventions, such as interlocking building bricks, gear assemblies, and motors, are intended to be restricted by patents, not by copyright. It's my understanding that lego's patent on interlocking toy building bricks expired many years ago. > 2) Let's say it is copyrightable and has some license or other on it. > I make a model (using the parts library) and publish it in 3d > format. What is the relationship between my model and the original > library? Is it considered a derivative work? If enough 3d, > finished models were gathered up, one could theoretically extract > the pieces and recreate the original parts library, circumventing > any license on the original library. Drawings of buildings intended to be built from lego bricks may be covered by copyright just like drawings of buildings intended to be built from real bricks. However, no copyright applies to the individual bricks. Even if the part sets turn out to be restricted by copryight, one might argue that the different types of lego bricks are like glyphs in a fontset. Even if a fontset is restricted by copyright, documents typeset in that font are not considered to be derived works of the typeset. I'll leave the rest for someone else to answer. -- Brian Ristuccia [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
