[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

License of ROOT: acceptable for non-free?



Hi all,
I am interested in packaging the ROOT analysis software [1].  The license 
is available here [2] and reads as follows:

----- (start license)

The authors hereby grant permission to use, copy, and distribute this 
software and its documentation for any purpose, provided that existing 
copyright notices are retained in all copies and that this notice is 
included verbatim in any distributions. Additionally, the authors grant 
permission to modify this software and its documentation for any purpose, 
provided that such modifications are not distributed without the explicit 
consent of the authors and that existing copyright notices are retained in 
all copies. Users of the software are asked to feed back problems, 
benefits, and/or suggestions about the software to the ROOT Development 
Team (rootdev@root.cern.ch). Support for this software - fixing of bugs, 
incorporation of new features - is done on a best effort basis. All bug 
fixes and enhancements will be made available under the same terms and 
conditions as the original software,

IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR DISTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE TO ANY PARTY FOR 
DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING 
OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, ITS DOCUMENTATION, OR ANY DERIVATIVES 
THEREOF, EVEN IF THE AUTHORS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH 
DAMAGE.

THE AUTHORS AND DISTRIBUTORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY WARRANTIES, 
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, 
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. THIS SOFTWARE IS 
PROVIDED ON AN "AS IS" BASIS, AND THE AUTHORS AND DISTRIBUTORS HAVE NO 
OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE MAINTENANCE, SUPPORT, UPDATES, ENHANCEMENTS, OR 
MODIFICATIONS. 

----- (end license)

Clearly the license is non-free due to the requirement that modified
versions not be distributed without the permission of the authors.  My
question is this: if I were to obtain permission from the authors for
Debian to distribute packaged binaries of Root, would that be sufficient 
for it to go into non-free?

As a side issue, a few non-essential programs in the Root tree link to
Cernlib libraries, which are GPL [3].  Hence if those programs are not GPL
themselves, they cannot legally be distributed, correct?  (Is this true
for both statically and dynamically linked binaries?)  If it is OK to
package the remainder of Root, I will mention this to upstream.

Thanks in advance,
--Kevin

[1] http://root.cern.ch
[2] http://root.cern.ch/root/License.html
[3] http://wwwinfo.cern.ch/asd/cernlib/conditions.html

-- 
Kevin McCarty                Physics Department
kmccarty@princeton.edu       Princeton University
www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty  Princeton, NJ 08544



Reply to: