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


On Thursday 15 June 2006 21:53, Michael Poole wrote:
> George Danchev writes:
> > Hello -legal,
> >
> > 	I'm currently packaging sofia-sip.org SIP User Agent library which is
> > licensed under LGPL [1]. There is also a large file populated with
> > several copyrights [2] related to the code as used and distributed by the
> > some of the library files. I did not spot any brutal non-DFSG issues, but
> > since it is large and complex I'd like to read some opinions from any
> > sharp eyed criticists. However I'm a little bit puzzled by the
> > "Restricted Rights" as mentioned within the paragraph pasted below [3]
> > when it comes to GOVERNMENT USE and DoD usages ?
> That kind of clause is generally used with proprietary COTS software
> to make it clear that the government did not pay for the development
> of the software and does not get "Unlimited rights" to it per
> 252.227-7013(b)(1).
> For example, when a project enters a new phase and a different
> contractor wins the phase than who won the previous phase, the
> government can give copies of "Unlimited rights" works to the new
> contract winner.  This helps the government get a little more mileage
> from its money and alleviates contractor "lock-in" for the life of a
> project.
> I suspect the reason to include it in open source software is similar,
> ensuring that copyleft licenses keep effect when the government passes
> a copy of the covered software to another party.  You would probably
> have to talk to the license writer's legal counsel to be 100% sure.

	Thanks for you clarifications. In fact there is similar jurisdical norm in my 
country also I was not aware of till that moment.

	I believe that the reason to have that in Sofia-SIP's 
libsofia-sip-ua/su/strtoull.c is that it comes that way from the original 
contributors like University of California and Sun Microsystems. Whom legal 
writer counsel do you suggest to talk to ? UCB & Sun's or the Sofia-SIP 
upstream which code is licensed under LGPL ? I don't believe that that clause 
makes it non-free as of DFSG, but if you think otherwise, please express your 

	Another source of pain could be linking Sofia-SIP with OpenSSL (which is 
optional by nice to have it there) and as suggested by Mark [1] it is safe to 
have so called OpenSSL_exception [2]. So the question is - is it fine to link 
LGPL (not GPL'ed) code with OpenSSL licensed code ? Otherwise I believe we 
can have that OpenSSL exception with no worries.

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSSL_exception

pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>
fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB 

Reply to: