Re: Sofia SIP COPYRIGHTS
"Nathanael Nerode" <neroden@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
[🔎] 20060620225641.GA16822@doctormoo.dyndns.org">news:[🔎] 20060620225641.GA16822@doctormoo.dyndns.org...
George Danchev wrote:
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.
The "restricted rights" thing is just fine and free as far as the DFSG,
IMHO, and
I've never heard anyone on debian-legal assert otherwise: the "restricted
rights"
clause simply asserts that the US Government doesn't get any more rights
than anyone
else.
The "restricted rights" thing might possibly be a GPL compatibility issue,
but
I'd ask the FSF (www.gnu.org) what they think about that. I would guess
not, but
what do I know.
I'm almost certain it does not affect GPL compatibility.
The last sentence is:
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
authors grant the U.S. Government and others acting in its behalf
permission to use and distribute the software in accordance with the
terms specified in this license.
So the government has at a minimum, the rights listed in the licence.
Indeed, the whole thing seems pointless, as the FARs are meanlingless.
Either the software designer granted the government rights, or they did not.
If they did not, the agency who listened to the FARs and assumed
"Unlimited rights" has violated copyright law. The FARs
do not trump copyright, and in fact only apply to the government.
As they are a regulation they cannot grant rights, only restrict them.
They can effectively grant rights by restricting a contractor for dening
those rights, but that only applies to contractors working for the
Government.
Reply to: