RE: Distribution of non-GPL models with GPL Software (Was: [Qucs-devel] Closed bugs)
Adding the debian maintainer, and debian-science list to make sure there aren't distribution objections before I start verifying everything.
Some background:
I would like to include some vendor specific SPICE models with Qucs, which are not under the GPL, but a license which (I hope) to be compliant to the DFSG.
In a recent email, Richard stated:
> [snip] but in my view all models which are not compiled and linked into Qucs may be
> considered merely as 'data' which is processed by Qucs.
> [snip]
> This is especially true with spice models, as in this case Qucs is merely interpreting a
> 'standard interface', the spice model is portable between multiple simulators,
> not tied to just Qucs.
The license suggestion is below.
Thanks
-Robin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Getz, Robin [mailto:Robin.Getz@analog.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 8:04 AM
> To: Richard Crozier; qucs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Qucs-devel] Closed bugs
>
> Richard:
>
> The goal is that no changes may be made that affect the performance or
> function of the model, which end users think are coming from Analog Devices.
>
>
> What I suggested to our SPICE team was something like:
>
> --------
> You may include copies of Analog Devices' SPICE models with any software you
> sell or distribute. However, you may not make changes to the redistributed
> copies of Analog Devices SPICE models other than to:
> 1. Include comments.
> 2. Change nomenclature so that it will run on Your company's
> software/open source software package which you help maintain.
>
> Any files which have been modified for any reason above, should be clearly
> marked (in the header, read me, appropriate software documentation, or file
> name change) that this is no longer an Analog Devices Inc verified/original SPICE
> model.
>
> Any changes beyond the above (which may affect performance or function of
> the model) are permitted, but must be distributed as a "patch file" alongside the
> original, unmodified spice model.
>
> --------
>
> Would you suggest anything else?
>
>
> From: Richard Crozier [mailto:r.crozier@ed.ac.uk]
>
> However, my immediate reaction is that I am not sure about distributing these
> models with Qucs, mainly because Users might assume everything that comes
> with Qucs is GPL or similar and inadvertently incriminate themselves. Having
> looked at the licence you link to, it's not all that permissive in my view, for
> instance:
>
> "You may include copies of Analog Devices' SPICE models with any software you
> sell or distribute. However, you may not make changes to the redistributed
> copies of Analog Devices SPICE models other than to:
>
> 1. Include comments.
> 2. Change nomenclature so that it will run on Your company's software. No
> changes may be made that affect the performance or function of the model."
>
> But in principle I see the benefit of distributing these models, and in practice
> think most users would not want to modify them. How about giving us a sense of
> what the tweaked licence for the subset of models you are interested in would
> be like though
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
>
> Build for Windows Store.
>
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Qucs-devel mailing list
> Qucs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qucs-devel
Reply to: