Fwd: Re: Net::Twitter question
Whilst chatting on IRC during an upgrade of Net::Twitter, dam pointed
out a potential licence issue with the Twitter-copyrighted parts. I
have emailed Marc (upstream and in Cc) for clarification, and he will
revert (see below).
PS Marc I wouldn't normally go forwarding personal email to lists, but I
feel that there is nothing in there that isn't fit for d-p consumption -
trust it's okay.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Net::Twitter question
Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 06:51:07 -0700
From: Marc Mims <email@example.com>
To: Antony Gelberg <firstname.lastname@example.org>
* Antony Gelberg <email@example.com> [100512 06:37]:
I'm trying to get the new version into Debian - it's been flagged that:
14:49 dam> antgel: Net/Twitter/Role/API/Search/Trends.pm has
Twitter as a copyright holder. and it is not clear whether the same
license applies to that parts
15:48 antgel> dam: Net/Twitter/Role/API/Search/Trends.pm has the
same copyright / licence as other .pm files in the module
Can you confirm or deny that the whole module is Artistic / GPL as
per the Perl licence?
I'll run it by the Twitter dev team (who will likely run it by their
[Side note: I attended the Twitter dev conference last month in San
Francisco. Sat down at a session and introduced myself to the person
next to me. He was a Twitter lawyer. A few minutes later, someone sat
down on the other side of me. Introduced himself as a Twitter lawyer.
So, I know they have at least two of them. :)]
I added the Twitter copyright notice because I had cut and pasted some
of the API method documentation from the Twitter web site. Most of it
has been edited since (on both sides).
I'm sure the license will stand, though. Twitter is OSS friendly.