Re: Advice on wicd license
David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm packaging wicd for Debian, and it's licensed under GPL-2+. However, one of its components (uninstall.sh) carries this license: # Copyright 2008 Robby Workman [EMAIL PROTECTED], Northport, AL, USA # Copyright 2008 Alan Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lizella, GA, USA # All rights reserved. This is redundant and confusing. Taken literally, it contradicts a grant of any license. It would be best for the copyright holder to remove this, since clearly they don't want to reserve *all* rights; they explicitly grant some of them unilaterally to the recipient. # Redistribution and use of this script, with or without modification, is # permitted Grants everything needed to be DFSG, so long as the restrictions don't take it back. provided that the following conditions are met: # # 1. Redistributions of this script must retain the above copyright #notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. This conditions is fine by the DFSG, and it also doesn't require redistribution under the same license terms; therefore, the combined work can be licensed under the GPL. # THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR ''AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED # WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF # MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. […] Standard warrantly disclaimer for free software, in unfortunate SHOUTY CAPITALS. No impact on DFSG-freedom or GPL compatibility, so fine. Redistribution [..] with or without modification, is permitted seems a free (as in speech) statement The whole license is effectively identical to the terms of the Expat license URL:http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt. The FSF expressly state that works licensed under the terms of the Expat license are GPL-compatible (meaning you can redistribute a derived work under the terms of the GPL) URL:http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#Expat. but that All rights reserved scaries me... You're right, and it should best be removed by the copyright holder. You might like to communicate with them if possible to get it removed, for maximum clarity of license terms. -- \ “Are you pondering what I'm pondering?” “I think so, Brain, but | `\why would anyone want a depressed tongue?” —_Pinky and The | _o__) Brain_ | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advice on wicd license
On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:19:55 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm packaging wicd for Debian, and it's licensed under GPL-2+. However, one of its components (uninstall.sh) carries this license: # Copyright 2008 Robby Workman [EMAIL PROTECTED], Northport, AL, USA # Copyright 2008 Alan Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lizella, GA, USA # All rights reserved. This is redundant and confusing. Taken literally, it contradicts a grant of any license. It would be best for the copyright holder to remove this, since clearly they don't want to reserve *all* rights; they explicitly grant some of them unilaterally to the recipient. Ok, understood. # Redistribution and use of this script, with or without modification, is # permitted Grants everything needed to be DFSG, so long as the restrictions don't take it back. In fact I saw it as DFSG-free, thanks for confirming. provided that the following conditions are met: # # 1. Redistributions of this script must retain the above copyright #notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. This conditions is fine by the DFSG, and it also doesn't require redistribution under the same license terms; therefore, the combined work can be licensed under the GPL. Fine. [..] Redistribution [..] with or without modification, is permitted seems a free (as in speech) statement The whole license is effectively identical to the terms of the Expat license URL:http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt. Well, I'd regard this license as a BSD-1, i.e. BSD with just the first clause (and the header): Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. (taken from /usr/share/common-licenses/BSD) Also, the BSD license itself has a All rights reserved at the top. Maybe I was just too overcautious asking here? But, well, here we say megghiu diri chi sacciu, chi no diri chi sapìa (that's Sicilian, not even Italian... it means it's better to say «I don't know», than saying «I didn't know», meaning better being cautious) The FSF expressly state that works licensed under the terms of the Expat license are GPL-compatible (meaning you can redistribute a derived work under the terms of the GPL) URL:http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#Expat. In any case, also the BSD license I'm referring above is GPL-compatible. but that All rights reserved scaries me... You're right, and it should best be removed by the copyright holder. You might like to communicate with them if possible to get it removed, for maximum clarity of license terms. Sure. I have a good communication with upstream, and they just released this new version because of other copyright issues (regarding a manpage)... only that they added this new script :( Thanks for your reply, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Advice on wicd license
David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:19:55 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: The whole license is effectively identical to the terms of the Expat license URL:http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt. Well, I'd regard this license as a BSD-1, i.e. BSD with just the first clause (and the header) […] Nevertheless, [the terms of] the Expat license is going to have you better understood when you want to refer to these terms. Also, the BSD license itself has a All rights reserved at the top. Many copyright statements have this. It seems to be some long-obsolete piece of copyright cruft, that would best be removed in every instance (since it's totally unnecessary in any Berne signatory jurisdiction). Maybe I was just too overcautious asking here? You are to be commended for asking. Please feel free to ask questions here again about DFSG-freedom of license terms. But, well, here we say megghiu diri chi sacciu, chi no diri chi sapìa (that's Sicilian, not even Italian... it means it's better to say «I don't know», than saying «I didn't know», meaning better being cautious) The current copyright regime certainly makes that a sensible policy to follow. You're right, and [the All rights reserved clause] should best be removed by the copyright holder. You might like to communicate with them if possible to get it removed, for maximum clarity of license terms. Sure. I have a good communication with upstream, and they just released this new version because of other copyright issues (regarding a manpage)... only that they added this new script :( In my estimation, the situation as you've described still makes the work DFSG-free. You should be able to proceed with confidence, while those negotiations for clarification go on. -- \ “I have a large seashell collection, which I keep scattered on | `\the beaches all over the world. Maybe you've seen it.” —Steven | _o__) Wright | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advice on wicd license
On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 19:03:27 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:19:55 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: You're right, and [the All rights reserved clause] should best be removed by the copyright holder. You might like to communicate with them if possible to get it removed, for maximum clarity of license terms. Sure. I have a good communication with upstream, and they just released this new version because of other copyright issues (regarding a manpage)... only that they added this new script :( In my estimation, the situation as you've described still makes the work DFSG-free. You should be able to proceed with confidence, while those negotiations for clarification go on. I already packaged this new version, re-sent my sponsor (and AM) the RFS, and waiting for his reply. Thanks, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Advice on wicd license
* Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080914 10:20]: David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm packaging wicd for Debian, and it's licensed under GPL-2+. However, one of its components (uninstall.sh) carries this license: # Copyright 2008 Robby Workman [EMAIL PROTECTED], Northport, AL, USA # Copyright 2008 Alan Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lizella, GA, USA # All rights reserved. This is redundant and confusing. Taken literally, it contradicts a grant of any license. It would be best for the copyright holder to remove this, since clearly they don't want to reserve *all* rights; they explicitly grant some of them unilaterally to the recipient. It's redundant since a long time but it's not really confusing or contradictorial. It's more like a iptables -P INPUT DROP iptables -F INPUT iptables -I INPUT -j ACCEPT It's setting first setting policy to claim copyright, and then gives a licence. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_rights_reserved (Though I would say it was essentially deprecated much earlier than that, but I'm not from the US, so even mentioning Berne Convention sounds like an anachronism in my ears...) Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
