hey rob (and -legal), thanks for following up with me on this. On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 02:08:40AM +1100, Rob Weir wrote: > > * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted > > * provided that this entire copyright notice is duplicated in all such > > * copies. i think you and i interpreted this differently. of course if there is any ambiguity, i should probably clear that up with them. to me, "Redistribution and use in source and binary" seemed to imply "redistribution in source and binary" and "use in source and binary", with the "use" of source including modification. but maybe i'm just reading into that too liberally. > > however, it's also built against the gnu regexp library, which is GPL'd. > > am i right in assuming that the software is then implicitly under > > the GPL? > > No, the above license is also incompatible with the GPL (since you don't > have the right to distribute modified versions), which means you can't > distribute it at all (even in non-free). so then technically they can't even redistribute it, because their program is built including GPL'd code? > You'll need to get them to grant permission to distribute modified > copies; re-licensing it under the 3-clause BSD or MIT/X licenses (which > are both DFSG-free and GPL-compatible) would work, and sound like they > do what upstream wants, anyway. if the code includes gpl source code, doesn't that mean the code has to be GPL'd too? > * Copyright 1995-1999 by DFN-CERT. All rights reserved. i'll try to follow up with DFN-CERT to get a clarification on this before i do any serious packaging work. thanks, sean
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature