XWatch GPL+XForms license (was Re: Intent to package xmemos)

[Peter S Galbraith <psg@debian.org>]

I'd like to seek a license change for xwatch, xplot and xcolmix
(currently GPL) for something like this:

     This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
     under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
     Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your
     option) any later version. 
 
     You may, at your option and for the purposes of distributing this
     program in object code or executable form under Section 3 of the GNU
     General Public License, assume that the xforms library (Copyright (c)
     by T.C. Zhao and Mark Overmars) is normally distributed with the major
     components of the operating system on which the executable or object
     code runs. If you choose not to excercise this option, you may
     distribute this software only under the terms of the GNU General
     Public License and may remove this paragraph.
 
     This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
     but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
     MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
     GNU General Public License for more details.
 
     You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
     along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
     Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307 USA

I'd be using Brian's suggested text (see below), but changed `as
distributed by ...' for `(Copyright (c) by T.C. Zhao and Mark Overmars)'
since that identifies the thing called XForms that people are allowed to
link with.  Should I add something like Brian's "and its successors"
anywhere?

Comments?  (I don't want to seek a change more than once.)

Thanks!
Peter 

Richard Braakman wrote:

> KELEMEN Peter wrote:
> > On Sat, 1999-03-27 23:24:31 -0800, Darren O. Benham wrote:
> > 
> > > Legally, you can not distribute GPL software that's been linked to
> > > xforms.  To include it in Debian, it has to be compiled against fltk.
> > > If it won't compile, it has to go the way of KDE.
> > 
> > XWatch is a similar program.  [...]
> 
> This is indeed a bug.  I've just filed it against xwatch.  Thanks
> for pointing it out.

I replied:
 
> Any comments from the legal crowd?  Any standard add-on XForms
> packages can add to the GPL?

Brian Ristuccia wrote:
 
>     GNU Hello World using xforms
>     Copyright (C) 1999 Joe Programmer
> 
>     This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
>     under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
>     Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your
>     option) any later version. 
> 
>     You may, at your option and for the purposes of distributing this
>     program in object code or executable form under Section 3 of the GNU
>     General Public License, assume that the xforms library as distributed by
>     Company XYZ, Inc. is normally distributed with the major components of
>     the operating system on which the executable or object code runs. If you
>     choose not to excercise this option, you may distribute this software
>     only under the terms of the GNU General Public License and may remove
>     this paragraph.
> 
>     This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>     but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>     MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>     GNU General Public License for more details.
> 
>     You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
>     along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
>     Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307 USA
> 
> I've suggested a similar clause like this in the past for a program that
> used QT, and after thinking about it for a while, I made some changes. Most
> importantly:
> 
> * Spell out "xforms as distributed by Company XYZ", or "QT as distributed by
>   Troll Tech" in order to prevent someone from creating another non-free
>   library called xforms or QT and then exploting the permission notice as a
>   loophole. You might want to include the company's address and perhaps the 
>   phrase "and its successors," but I don't know if this may introduce any 
>   unneccessary loopholes or limitations. 
> 
> * Allow distribution of the source under the plain GPL to limit license
>   incompatibility. ("If you choose not to excercise this option, you may
>   distribute this software only under the terms of the GNU General Public
>   License and may remove this paragraph.") This would allow parts of xmemos
>   that don't require xforms to be used in other GPL'd projects.