Re: Crypto++ licencing

[Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu>]

Stephen Zander <gibreel@pobox.com> wrote:
> >>>>> "Walter" == Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu> writes:
>     Walter> The patent issue is not a problem specific to the license.
>     Walter> Rather, it depends on what algorithms are implemented.
>     Walter> What algorithms are used?  A usual suspect is IDEA, which
>     Walter> is patented in many countries.
> 
> According to <URL:http://www.eskimo.com/~weidai/algorithms.html>, the
> potentially patented algorithms are:
> 
> * DSS
> * LUC
> * IDEA

DSS and IDEA are both patented in Europe, so putting it in non-us
won't help.  There is also the minor problem that non-us is going the
away.  It is crypto, so you should talk to the release manager about
how to handle it.  I only know what he wants done for software
currently in non-us.

It doesn't sound like anyone is actually enforcing the LUC patent, if
it exists.  I would just put it in main until we have more
information.

It sounds like the patent holders are charging to use DSS.  Since it
isn't very good anyway, I would recommend just removing it.  IDEA, on
the other hand, is a good algorithm, but only free for non-commercial
uses.  You could split that out and put that library in non-free.  The
rest goes in main.  Speak-freely is in non-free for the same reason.

Regards,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org