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

Re: php5-xapian: PHP licence vs GPL

On 2009-04-17, Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:09:57 +0200 Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Olly Betts:
>> > To summarise, php5-xapian wraps the GPLv2+ licensed Xapian library for
>> > PHP v3.01 licensed PHP5.
>> The PHP license is fine if you use Xapian under the GPLv3.
> The FSF seems to disagree: quoting from
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses
>| PHP License, Version 3.01
>| This license is used by most of PHP4. It is a non-copyleft free
>| software license. It is incompatible with the GNU GPL because it
>| includes strong restrictions on the use of "PHP" in the name of
>| derived products.
>| We recommend that you not use this license for anything except PHP
>| add-ons.
> As you may see, GPL *incompatibility* is explicitly stated.

It's possible this FAQ entry may not have been updated for GPLv3 - I
notice that it talks about PHP4, which is obsolete now, and PHP5 predates

I guess Florian's thinking is based on additional restrictions allowed
by GPLv3 7c:

    c) Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or
    requiring that modified versions of such material be marked in
    reasonable ways as different from the original version  

If so, the key issue seems to be whether the naming restriction in section 4
of the PHP licence can be considered "reasonable":

  4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
     may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
     from group@php.net.  You may indicate that your software works in
     conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
     it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"

Since the FSF FAQ describes these as "strong restrictions", I guess they
at least probably wouldn't regard them as "reasonable".


Reply to: