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

Mozilla can't be GPL? (was: pkcs#11 license)


I continue my work on the problematic RSA licence I started in [1].

Andreas Jellinghaus, OpenSC author, also asked similar questions:

MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
> Andreas Jellinghaus <aj@dungeon.inka.de> wrote:
> > Does it cause incompatibilities with GPL'ed applications?
> Yes, I think it's like the BSD ad clause and would be better as a
> request than a requirement.

After a bit of research we (Andreas, me and some others) found that all
the applications using the PKCS#11 API also use tha RSA header files.
These header files are the API reference so it is normal to use them.

One major application using the RSA header files is Mozilla.
For example the file (from the Debian package)
contains a verbatim copy of a RSA header file and includes as licence:

 * The contents of this file are subject to the Mozilla Public
 * License Version 1.1 (the "License"); you may not use this file
 * except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of
 * the License at http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/
 * Software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS
 * IS" basis, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, either express or
 * implied. See the License for the specific language governing
 * rights and limitations under the License.
 * The Original Code is the Netscape security libraries.
 * The Initial Developer of the Original Code is Netscape
 * Communications Corporation.  Portions created by Netscape are 
 * Copyright (C) 1994-2000 Netscape Communications Corporation.  All
 * Rights Reserved.
 * Contributor(s): RSA Labs
 * Alternatively, the contents of this file may be used under the
 * terms of the GNU General Public License Version 2 or later (the
 * "GPL"), in which case the provisions of the GPL are applicable 
 * instead of those above.  If you wish to allow use of your 
 * version of this file only under the terms of the GPL and not to
 * allow others to use your version of this file under the MPL,
 * indicate your decision by deleting the provisions above and
 * replace them with the notice and other provisions required by
 * the GPL.  If you do not delete the provisions above, a recipient
 * may use your version of this file under either the MPL or the
 * GPL.
 * Copyright (C) 1994-1999 RSA Security Inc. Licence to copy this document
 * is granted provided that it is identified as "RSA Security In.c Public-Key
 * Cryptography Standards (PKCS)" in all material mentioning or referencing
 * this document.
 * The latest version of this header can be found at:
 *    http://www.rsalabs.com/pkcs/pkcs-11/index.html

- Does the RSA publicity clause conflict with the GPL used by Mozilla?
- Is Mozilla using an illegal licence?
- Should Debian stop distributing Mozilla?

I guess Mozilla lawyers already thought about the problem. Anybody knows if
they consider the RSA publicity clause in conflict with GPL?

I can't find information about this problem in the Mozilla crypto FAQ [2].


[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/09/msg00537.html
[2] http://www.mozilla.org/crypto-faq.html#1-3

Ludovic Rousseau

Reply to: