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

Re: EllisLab, Inc. CodeIgniter license

Le mercredi 29 octobre 2008 à 23:34 +0100, Francesco Poli a écrit :
> > 4. Any files that have been modified must carry notices stating the nature
> >    of the change and the names of those who changed them.
> An obligation to maintain a sort of change-log is normally acceptable.
> The second part of the clause is more troublesome: depending on how it
> should be interpreted, it could meet the DFSG or fail to do so.
> If I am allowed to modify a file, document the nature of the change and
> put a nickname (or a pseudonym, or even the term "anonymous") as the
> name of the modifier, then I think this clause complies with the DFSG.
> On the other hand, if I am compelled to disclose my own identity in
> order to distribute a file modified by me, then I think that this
> clause fails DFSG#1, since being forced to disclose one's own identity
> can be a fee.
> See also  http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/05/msg00015.html
> for a more detail explanation of the issue (found in another license).

This may depend on local law, but I don’t think this prevents you from
using a pseudonym as "name". A name is different from an identity, so I
don’t think this clause causes any trouble.

> > 6. Products derived from the Software may not be called "CodeIgniter",
> This is considered acceptable (as a compromise!) per DFSG#4.
> >    nor may "CodeIgniter" appear in their name, without prior written
> >    permission from EllisLab, Inc.
> IMHO, this goes beyond what is permitted (as a compromise!) by DFSG#4,
> since it forbids an infinite set of names, rather than a single one.
> I cannot use any of the following names for a derived product:
> CodeIgniterNG, CodeIgniter++, SuperCodeIgniter, TinyCodeIgniter, ...

In all cases you will not be allowed to use such names unless you obtain
a trademark exception, so I don’t think this is problematic either.

> > You agree to indemnify and hold harmless the authors of the Software and
> > any contributors for any direct, indirect, incidental, or consequential
> > third-party claims, actions or suits, as well as any related expenses,
> > liabilities, damages, settlements or fees arising from your use or misuse
> > of the Software, or a violation of any terms of this license.
> Warning: indemnification clause: is it acceptable?
> It smells as non-free, but I would like to know the opinion of other
> debian-legal regulars...

At least this is already accepted in main, see e.g. postfix.

: :' :      We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `'       We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
  `-        our own. Resistance is futile.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

Reply to: