Re: licenses in slib
> Please CC me on all responses. I'm not subscribed to this list.
>
> It was pointed out to me (by the VP at the FSF) that slib's license is
> non-free. I was surprised. Last word I heard is that the FSF was
> talking to slib upstream about the licenses, but it wasn't looking
> good getting it fixed. So the question is is slib even allowed in
> non-free with it's licenses. I've attached below (in a bit messy way)
> the licenses on each file in the dist not copying the license if no
> need. Let me know what people think about including it in non-free.
>
> Thanks
> Jim
Most of the licenses are fine even in main. The only problems I saw
were ones that had a clause like
> ; 2. Users of this software agree to make their best efforts (a) to
> ; return to me any improvements or extensions that they make, so that
> ; these may be included in future releases; and (b) to inform me of
> ; noteworthy uses of this software.
which puts it in non-free. This puts a restriction on _use_, which is
quite onerous. If a member of the Falung Gong wants to use the
library to communicate with their cohorts, they have to tell MIT
etc. what they are doing. Also, this kind of clause becomes quite
onerous if you have to contact several different people when improving
the code.
Also, there is the license
> byte.scm determ.scm mularg.scm
> ;; NO COPYRIGHT
Is this giving up copyright, or are you just saying that there was no
copyright statement in the file? If there is no permission to copy a
file, then it can't even go in main. This is probably just an
oversight.
> ;;; "scaoutp.scm" syntax-case output
> ;;; Copyright (C) 1992 R. Kent Dybvig
> ;;;
> ;;; Permission to copy this software, in whole or in part, to use this
> ;;; software for any lawful purpose, and to redistribute this software
> ;;; is granted subject to the restriction that all copies made of this
> ;;; software must include this copyright notice in full. This software
> ;;; is provided AS IS, with NO WARRANTY, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
> ;;; INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY
> ;;; OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
> ;;; AUTHORS BE LIABLE FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES OF ANY
> ;;; NATURE WHATSOEVER.
The "lawful purpose" part is annoying, but is fine for non-free.
Regards,
Walter Landry
landry@physics.utah.edu
Reply to: