Re: Plugins for non-free software in orig.tar.gz
Hi,
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 00:48:45 Francesco Poli wrote:
> > I packaged Aqsis recently:
> > http://packages.debian.org/source/unstable/aqsis
>
> Thank you for doing so: it looks like an interesting tool...
Actually it was already packaged long ago, I'm just packaging the latest
version since the maintainer has been unattending it for years.
> I think the key questions here are:
>
> 0) does the plugin itself comply with the DFSG?
It doesn't have any copyright line, other than:
# This document is under CC-3.0 Attribution-Share Alike 3.0
# http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
# Attribution: There is no requirement to attribute the author.
#
# Produced by:
# Side Effects Software Inc
# 123 Front Street West, Suite 1401
# Toronto, Ontario
# Canada M5J 2M2
# 416-504-9876
in RIBaqsis1.6.py
The author as far as I know is from Aqsis Team, everything is released under
GPL or LGPL.
> 1) does the plugin require anything outside of main for compilation?
It doesn't seem to need compilation, they're python scripts (or a variant
called "hython"), .bat and .sh scripts... you can see everything under
"tools/neqsus" in the source:
http://aqsis.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=aqsis/aqsis;a=tree;f=tools/neqsus/houdini;h=79987b52ff4275b2792a0328c8673e711c16424d;hb=HEAD
The project leader told me: "Leon will confirm, but I think it's a script to
convert our slx output into something that Houdini can use to display shader
parameters in the UI."
> 2) does the plugin constitute a secondary feature of aqsis?
>
> I suppose the answer to question number 2 is affirmative, since you say
> that you can disable it, and that it's not that important...
Sure, the project leader told me also that there would be no problem in
removing it... so the main question is how do I name orig.tar.gz, create the
patches, if I have to name the binary packages like 'dfsg' or something
similar.
> > Any hints?
>
> Another question, before I forget.
> The debian/copyright file for aqsis
> http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/a/aqsis/aqsis_1.6.0-1.1/a
> qsis.copyright
>
> states:
> | Copyright for 'sdcBMP/d_sdcBMP.cpp' and 'sdcWin32/d_sdcWin32.cpp' under
> | 'tools/displays/' directory:
> | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> | --------- COPYRIGHT
> |
> | Copyright 2000 by Schroff Development Corporation, Shawnee-Mission,
> | Kansas, United States of America. All rights reserved.
> |
> | *********************************************************************
> | *******
> |
> | This Display Driver is distributed as "freeware". There are no
> | restrictions on its' usage.
> |
> | *********************************************************************
> | *******
> |
> | DISCLAIMER OF ALL WARRANTIES AND LIABILITY
> |
> | Schroff Development Corporation makes no warranties, either expressed
> | or implied, with respect to the programs contained within this file, or
> | with respect to software used in conjunction with these programs. The
> | programs are distributed 'as is'. The entire risk as to its quality
> | and performance is assumed by the purchaser. Schroff Development
> | Corporation does not guarantee, warrant or make any representation
> | regarding the use of, or the results of the use of the programs in
> | terms of correctness, accuracy, reliability, or performance. Schroff
> | Development Corporation assumes no liability for any direct, indirect,
> | or consquential, special or exemplary damages, regardless of its
> | having been advised of the possibility of such damage.
> | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> | ---------
>
> I cannot see any permission to distribute and/or sell these two files
> (DFSG#1); also, I cannot see any permission to modify (DFSG#3).
> Hence, it seems to me that those two files fail to comply with the
> DFSG, and should consequently be removed from the package, if at all
> possible, or substituted by DFSG-free replacements.
>
> Or am I missing something?
Well, that was already in the previous 1.2 version of Aqsis that has been in
Debian repositories for years, I didn't put much attention to it. I
understand "freeware" and "no restrictions on usage" and the rest of the
copyright as a generic/lazy way of saying that they don't care about what's
done with them (other than misrepresent them, etc). But you may know
better, since probably similar license issues arose in the past?
They are for:
"This is a Display Driver that was written to comply with the PhotoRealistic
RenderMan Display Driver Implementation Guide (on the web at:
www.pixar.com/products/rendermandocs/toolkit/Toolkit/dspy.html).
This driver places image data into a Windows .BMP file. It writes this data
one scanline at a time and tries to minimize memory consumption."
And the win32 one:
"This driver displays image data to a Win32 window which it creates and
manages."
I can ask if they can be removed or are a very important part of the
program, if you want, but I don't think so: the BMP wuoldn't be very popular
probably, and other tools inside Aqsis use FLTK (multi-platform windowing
toolkit, AFAIK) to show the rendered project...
------------------
Apart from that, I asked today to the project leader if they had any other
kind of restrictions or non-GPL/non-BSD licenses and such:
<mafm> are you aware of more cases similar to that? more plugins only useful
with proprietary software?
<mafm> or any third party software with non-GPL or non-BSD licenses?
<pgregory> hold on...
<pgregory> the only other plugins we ship are for use with Blender.
[...]
<mafm> pgregory: also, what happens with the shaders?
<mafm> they're copyright of Pixar :S
<pgregory> not much we can do about that, if we dont' ship them we're not
compliant.
<mafm> but under which license are they?
<pgregory> I don't think Pixar actually specify a license, if they do, I'm
not aware of it.
<mafm> if they can't be distributed, in example, aren't you in possible
trouble?
<mafm> or they do intend to be distributed?
<pgregory> they can be distributed, with the copyright intact.
<mafm> hmm, no problem then
<mafm> copyrights should always be intact anyway :)
<pgregory> I'll see if I can find a reference to this somewhere, if you
don't hear from me in the next couple of days, remind me. I'm very busy just
now, so might well forget.
Cheers, and thanks a lot.
--
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>
Reply to: