Re: Code in lwIPv6 library under advertising requirement
On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 19:34:31 +1100 Ben Finney wrote: > Howdy all, Hello Ben! :-) [...] > By my understanding of copyright as the Debian project interprets the > conventions, a work subject to several sets of license conditions is > subject to the total set of restrictions. Indeed, this is also my own understanding of copyright laws. (With the usual warning that I am not a lawyer, and I do not speak on behalf of the Debian Project...) [...] > So is a work under conditions of the BSD 4-clause license with its > “obnoxious advertising clause”, or other license conditions with an > equivalent clause, DFSG-free? I think the answer is no. I disagree with you here: the 4-clause BSD license includes a clause that is indeed obnoxious, but *not* non-free. It meets the DFSG, as far as I can tell. It's not a recommended license, but it is acceptable for Debian main and has been actually accepted several times in Debian main, as far as I know. > > Does this mean the ‘lwipv6’ work is non-free with the inclusion of files > as per the example above? There are quite a few of them. I think the issue here is that the 4-clause BSD license is GPL-incompatible. I see three possible solution strategies (in order of decreasing desirability): A) the copyright holders for the 4-clause BSD licensed parts are contacted and asked to drop the obnoxious advertising clause for the code under consideration; if they agree, everything becomes fine and GPL-compatible or B) the 4-clause BSD licensed parts are independently reimplemented or replaced by suitable alternatives under GPL-compatible terms or C) the copyright holders for the GPLv2 licensed parts are contacted and asked to re-license their code under terms that are compatible with the various BSD licenses used in the work (including the 4-clause BSD license); if they agree, the incompatibilities are solved I hope this helps. Bye. -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/ There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! . Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE pgpiJwQ6d_fDr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Code in lwIPv6 library under advertising requirement
> * Gregory M. Christy grants license under equivalent of BSD 4-clause > with advertising requirement. This Gregory Christy looks promising: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gregory-christy-5b08a134 > * The Australian National University grants license under equivalent > of BSD 4-clause with advertising requirement. According to ANU's website,[1] copyright-related requests should be sent to the University Librarian at library.i...@anu.edu.au, or you can call them on (02) 6125 2003. [1] http://www.anu.edu.au/copyright Good luck! pgpXWVoqYg0L8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Code in lwIPv6 library under advertising requirement
Howdy all, I have been examining the licenses of the ‘lwipv6’ source package in Debian https://sources.debian.net/src/lwipv6/>. Many of the files have copyright claimed by several copyright holders, and some of the copyright holders have applied different license conditions over time. By my understanding of copyright as the Debian project interprets the conventions, a work subject to several sets of license conditions is subject to the total set of restrictions. Prior license conditions do not cease to hold merely by applying a new license on top. The overall code base is distributed with copyright clamed (in https://sources.debian.net/src/lwipv6/1.5a-2/README.LICENSE/>) by: © 2004–2011 Renzo Davoli University of Bologna - Italy © 2001–2004 Swedish Institute of Computer Science When I inspect the copyright license conditions of, e.g., ‘chap.c’ https://sources.debian.net/src/lwipv6/1.5a-2/lwip-v6/src/netif/ppp/chap.c/> the declared copyright holders are: © 2003 Marc Boucher, Services Informatiques (MBSI) inc. © 1997 Global Election Systems Inc. © 1993 The Australian National University © 1991 Gregory M. Christy So by my reading, copyright in that file is under license conditions as set by *all* those copyright holders in that file, simultaneously. The specified license conditions are: * Gregory M. Christy grants license under equivalent of BSD 4-clause with advertising requirement. * The Australian National University grants license under equivalent of BSD 4-clause with advertising requirement. * Global Election Systems Inc., and Marc Boucher, Services Informatiques (MBSI) inc., both grant license under equivalent of BSD 2-clause. As for the overall code base: * Swedish Institute of Computer Science grants license under BSD 3-clause. * Renzo Davoli University of Bologna - Italy grants license under GNU GPL v2. The recipient only has license if all those license conditions can be satisfied, IIUC. So is a work under conditions of the BSD 4-clause license with its “obnoxious advertising clause”, or other license conditions with an equivalent clause, DFSG-free? I think the answer is no. Does this mean the ‘lwipv6’ work is non-free with the inclusion of files as per the example above? There are quite a few of them. Do those files need to be removed to make the work free? I don't know whether that's feasible. -- \ “… whoever claims any right that he is unwilling to accord to | `\ his fellow-men is dishonest and infamous.” —Robert G. | _o__) Ingersoll, _The Liberty of Man, Woman and Child_, 1877 | Ben Finney
