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

Re: Question about RSA licence



On 01 Nov 2005 19:12:20 GMT MJ Ray wrote:

> Francesco Poli <frx@winstonsmith.info> wrote:
> > |     License to copy and use this software is granted provided that
> > | it is identified as "RSA Security Inc. PKCS #11 Cryptographic
> > | Token Interface (Cryptoki)" in all material mentioning or
> > | referencing this software or this function.
> > 
> > Permission to copy is granted for something that is clearly
> > unmodified (it must be identified as "RSA Security Inc. PKCS #11
> > Cryptographic Token Interface (Cryptoki)").
> 
> It (the original) is still so identified by the following:
> 
> > |     License is also granted to make and use derivative works
> > | provided that such works are identified as "derived from the RSA
> > | Security Inc. PKCS #11 Cryptographic Token Interface (Cryptoki)"
> > | in all material mentioning or referencing the derived work.
> 
> I think it's a stretch to claim the permission only covers
> unmodifieds. It would be better clearer, but it doesn't seem a
> problem.

I think it's a stretch to claim the opposite...
I mean: there are two separate grants of permission. The former clearly
refers to unmodified copies, the latter to derivative works. The former
allows me to copy and use, the latter only permits creation and use (it
doesn't talk about copying or distribution _at all_).

How can we assume we are allowed to distribute a derivative work?

> 
> [...]
> > > Yes. That seems to be a copyright *notice*, not a licence.
> > > What licence covers the file?
> > 
> > The debian/copyright file does not seem to say that. Hence *either*
> > debian/copyright is incomplete (minor bug) *or* testmd4.c is
> > undistributable (serious bug).
> > Is that right?
> 
> Given the main licence does not enumerates exactly which parts
> it covers, I'd suspect incomplete if anything, but I don't see
> why you're so sure it's not under the main licence's terms.

I'm not sure, but /usr/share/doc/apache2/copyright states (after the
main license):

| The Apache HTTP Server includes a number of subcomponents with
| separate copyright notices and license terms. Your use of the source
| code for the these subcomponents is subject to the terms and
| conditions of the following licenses. 

and then starts enumerating the subcomponents along with their own
copyright notices _and license terms_.
What I quoted for the srclib\apr-util\test\testmd4.c component is all
that is said about this file in /usr/share/doc/apache2/copyright ...
I cannot see how we could assume this file to be under the main
license...

-- 
    :-(   This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS?   ;-)
......................................................................
  Francesco Poli                             GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpiWGex2I0mX.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: