[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Licening ibwebadmin and JSRS

On 2004-06-28 23:39:57 +0100 Remco Seesink <raseesink@hotpop.com> wrote:

however they see fit. You may not copyright it yourself or change the rules I have
set on how it can be used.
[...] It appears to deny me the right to
assert copyright in any derived works I may create. I think this is a
regular bug in the wording of the license, caused by letting a
non-lawyer write a license, and should be easily corrected.

The GPL incompatible part is solved by the linking exception. I read the DFSG three times and I can't find the part which states that derived work must go to the creator of that work.

The affected guideline is 3. Derived Works.

Should this be the reason the software can't go into debian? Is there a way around it? Is this the only way to interpret it? What about the rest of the text?

As I understand English law, my copyright exists whenever I create something which crosses whatever threshold the law has. Copyright is a result of my creative effort, not some action I do by registering or asserting ownership, at least in countries in the Berne Union( see Arnoud Galactus Engelfriet's handy site at http://www.iusmentis.com/copyright/crashcourse/intro/ for more).

Effectively, if this licence is saying that I cannot copyright a derived work myself, then it is denying me the right to do any copyrightable modification, which means I can't create a derived work under these terms.

That's one possible interpretation, depending what "it" is referring to. If you interpret "it" as only referring to the original software, not the ensemble of your modifications and the original, then this problem goes away. BUT, if you read it like that (excuse pun), you seem to have no permission to *distribute* a derived work.

Each way you interpret it, it seems to miss something. Really, I agree with Andrew Suffield again (warning: End of World ahead). This is clumsy wording and I would be unhappy if it got into debian. I wish you luck persuading the author, but I think gutting/replacing the JSRS may be the cleanest.

MJR/slef    My Opinion Only and not of any group I know
http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing
"To be English is not to be baneful / To be standing by
the flag not feeling shameful / Racist or partial..."

Reply to: