Re: request-tracker3: licence problem
Glenn Maynard writes:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 08:44:13AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
>> Andrew Stribblehill writes:
>> > | By intentionally submitting any modifications, corrections or
>> > | derivatives to this work, or any other work intended for use with Request
>> > | Tracker, to Best Practical Solutions, LLC, you confirm that you are the
>> > | copyright holder for those contributions and you grant Best Practical
>> > | Solutions, LLC a nonexclusive, worldwide, irrevocable, royalty-free,
>> > | perpetual, license to use, copy, create derivative works based on those
>> > | contributions, and sublicense and distribute those contributions and
>> > | any derivatives thereof.
> ...
>> > Regardless of whether or not this can be enforced in specific
>> > countries, it is now compatible with the GPL as far as I can tell.
>
>> [snip]
>> > Can anyone who had a problem with the old licence appendage confirm
>> > that the new one looks okay?
>>
>> It looks good to me. In addition to looking legally correct, it is
>> clear that it's not a license condition, but a condition of submitting
>> changes upstream.
>
> I can't tell if this is clear. If it's alongside the license, I'd
> suspect it was intended as a license condition. (Otherwise, how could
> it possibly have any force?) If so, it definitely seems GPL-incompatible;
> it's a restriction not present in the GPL. I don't know if that matters.
I assume it will be alongside the GPL header, just replacing the
current last paragraph (this is from request-tracker3 3.0.11-1's
/usr/share/request-tracker3/html/l):
%# BEGIN LICENSE BLOCK
%#
%# Copyright (c) 1996-2003 Jesse Vincent <jesse@bestpractical.com>
%#
%# (Except where explictly superceded by other copyright notices)
%#
%# This work is made available to you under the terms of Version 2 of
%# the GNU General Public License. A copy of that license should have
%# been provided with this software, but in any event can be snarfed
%# from www.gnu.org.
%#
%# This work 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.
%#
%# Unless otherwise specified, all modifications, corrections or
%# extensions to this work which alter its source code become the
%# property of Best Practical Solutions, LLC when submitted for
%# inclusion in the work.
%#
%#
%# END LICENSE BLOCK
As discussed before, the "BEGIN/END" comments were only intended for
automated processing tools, and Jesse offered to change the "LICENSE
BLOCK" to something like "BP HEADER BLOCK". I forget the exact new
wording that was mentioned.
The new submission paragraph is triggered "[b]y intentionally
submitting any modifications... to Best Practical Solutions." I
suppose it comes into force by a programmer reading it and sending the
code to Best Practical anyway. How does it limit the activities
permitted by the GPL or mandated by the DFSG? If does not limit those
activities, what makes it a license condition?
(Compare this with the rights conferred to others when you contribute
code under a three-clause BSD license. I'll leave GPL compatibility
for separate discussion, but I think the new clause is DFSG-free
whether or not it is considered part of the license.)
Michael Poole
Reply to: