Re: Sofia SIP COPYRIGHTS
libsofia-sip-ua/ipt/rc4.c The package also contains files written by Pekka Pessi. These files are distributed with the following copyright notice: Copyright (c) 1996 Pekka Pessi. All rights reserved. This source code is provided for unrestricted use. Users may copy or modify this source code without charge. THIS SOURCE CODE IS PROVIDED AS IS WITH NO WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND INCLUDING THE WARRANTIES OF DESIGN, MERCHANTIBILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR ARISING FROM A COURSE OF DEALING, USAGE OR TRADE PRACTICE. This source code is provided with no support and without any obligation on the part of author to assist in its use, correction, modification or enhancement. AUTHOR SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY WITH RESPECT TO THE INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHTS, TRADE SECRETS OR ANY PATENTS BY THIS SOFTWARE OR ANY PART THEREOF. In no event will author be liable for any lost revenue or profits or other special, indirect and consequential damages, even if author has been advised of the possibility of such damages. No right to sell is explicitly granted. It may be implicit from the words "unrestricted use". It is an arc4 implementation, so it really should not be difficult to replace, if this is worrisome. libsofia-sip-ua/su/getopt.c The package also contains files licensed by IBM Corporation. These files are distributed with the following copyright notice: This module contains code made available by IBM Corporation on an AS IS basis. Any one receiving the module is considered to be licensed under IBM copyrights to use the IBM-provided source code in any way he or she deems fit, including copying it, compiling it, modifying it, and redistributing it, with or without modifications. No license under any IBM patents or patent applications is to be implied from this copyright license. A user of the module should understand that IBM cannot provide technical support for the module and will not be responsible for any consequences of use of the program. Any notices, including this one, are not to be removed from the module without the prior written consent of IBM. Again, no explicit right to sell. However considering that this is IBM, I doubt there is any danger. It is a generic getopt implementation so replacing it would also be trivial if needed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sofia SIP COPYRIGHTS
Michael Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > George Danchev writes: > > Another source of pain could be linking Sofia-SIP with OpenSSL > > (which is optional by nice to have it there) and as suggested by > > Mark [1] it is safe to have so called OpenSSL_exception [2]. So > > the question is - is it fine to link LGPL (not GPL'ed) code with > > OpenSSL licensed code ? Otherwise I believe we can have that > > OpenSSL exception with no worries. > > The OpenSSL people claim there is no need, but the customary practice > is for any LGPL'ed (or GPL'ed) work that links directly against > OpenSSL to have the "OpenSSL exception" granted by its copyright > holders. I am not sure what the requirement is for scenarios where > the program also links against other LGPL'ed libraries, as in: > > gcc -o program $(OBJECT_FILES) -lssl -lsome_lgpl_lib For LGPL'd code, there is no problem with linking in OpenSSL code. The problem only arises for GPL'd code, because the GPL requires everything which makes part of the "whole" to be licensed under terms no more restrictive than the GPL. The LGPL only requires that for the library itself, not modules it links with. CUPS provides an OpenSSL exemption because a lot of their code is under the GPL, not the LGPL. Cheers, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sofia SIP COPYRIGHTS
George Danchev writes: > Michael, > Thanks for you clarifications. In fact there is similar jurisdical norm > in my > country also I was not aware of till that moment. > > I believe that the reason to have that in Sofia-SIP's > libsofia-sip-ua/su/strtoull.c is that it comes that way from the original > contributors like University of California and Sun Microsystems. Whom legal > writer counsel do you suggest to talk to ? UCB & Sun's or the Sofia-SIP > upstream which code is licensed under LGPL ? I don't believe that that clause > makes it non-free as of DFSG, but if you think otherwise, please express your > points. I agree that the "restricted rights" limitation is compatible with DFSG freedoms. The end of that paragraph also makes it clear that the government has the same license rights as anyone else. Unless someone else sees an issue, I think the clause as written is clearly free, and see no need to talk to the UC Regents or Sun to clarify the intention. > Another source of pain could be linking Sofia-SIP with OpenSSL (which > is > optional by nice to have it there) and as suggested by Mark [1] it is safe to > have so called OpenSSL_exception [2]. So the question is - is it fine to link > LGPL (not GPL'ed) code with OpenSSL licensed code ? Otherwise I believe we > can have that OpenSSL exception with no worries. The OpenSSL people claim there is no need, but the customary practice is for any LGPL'ed (or GPL'ed) work that links directly against OpenSSL to have the "OpenSSL exception" granted by its copyright holders. I am not sure what the requirement is for scenarios where the program also links against other LGPL'ed libraries, as in: gcc -o program $(OBJECT_FILES) -lssl -lsome_lgpl_lib Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sofia SIP COPYRIGHTS
On Thursday 15 June 2006 21:53, Michael Poole wrote: > George Danchev writes: > > Hello -legal, > > > > I'm currently packaging sofia-sip.org SIP User Agent library which is > > licensed under LGPL [1]. There is also a large file populated with > > several copyrights [2] related to the code as used and distributed by the > > some of the library files. I did not spot any brutal non-DFSG issues, but > > since it is large and complex I'd like to read some opinions from any > > sharp eyed criticists. However I'm a little bit puzzled by the > > "Restricted Rights" as mentioned within the paragraph pasted below [3] > > when it comes to GOVERNMENT USE and DoD usages ? > > That kind of clause is generally used with proprietary COTS software > to make it clear that the government did not pay for the development > of the software and does not get "Unlimited rights" to it per > 252.227-7013(b)(1). > > For example, when a project enters a new phase and a different > contractor wins the phase than who won the previous phase, the > government can give copies of "Unlimited rights" works to the new > contract winner. This helps the government get a little more mileage > from its money and alleviates contractor "lock-in" for the life of a > project. > > I suspect the reason to include it in open source software is similar, > ensuring that copyleft licenses keep effect when the government passes > a copy of the covered software to another party. You would probably > have to talk to the license writer's legal counsel to be 100% sure. Michael, Thanks for you clarifications. In fact there is similar jurisdical norm in my country also I was not aware of till that moment. I believe that the reason to have that in Sofia-SIP's libsofia-sip-ua/su/strtoull.c is that it comes that way from the original contributors like University of California and Sun Microsystems. Whom legal writer counsel do you suggest to talk to ? UCB & Sun's or the Sofia-SIP upstream which code is licensed under LGPL ? I don't believe that that clause makes it non-free as of DFSG, but if you think otherwise, please express your points. Another source of pain could be linking Sofia-SIP with OpenSSL (which is optional by nice to have it there) and as suggested by Mark [1] it is safe to have so called OpenSSL_exception [2]. So the question is - is it fine to link LGPL (not GPL'ed) code with OpenSSL licensed code ? Otherwise I believe we can have that OpenSSL exception with no worries. [1] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-voip-maintainers/2006-June/005018.html [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSSL_exception -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
