Hi Comrades,
We are considering packaging XNAT [1]. Its license terms [2] look like an
apache 1.1 like license with additional disclaimers (not for clinical
use), and requests. Could you please advise either those of particular concern
forbidding XNAT entering main?
Here is the full list of terms with my takes on their main
"appropriateness"
1. Redistribution and use, with or without modification, must retain
the author's(s') copyright notice(s) as documented in the source code.
Redistributions in binary code must reproduce the author's(s') copyright
notice(s) as documented in the source code. This list of conditions, the
disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
distribution must also be retained or reproduced.
ok
2. None of the names, logos, or trademarks of Harvard, HHMI, Washington
University, any Licensor or any of Licensor's affiliates or any of the
Contributors may be used to endorse or promote products produced in whole or in
part by operation of the software or derived from or based on the software
without specific prior written permission from the applicable party.
ok
3. The acknowledgment "This product includes XNAT, developed by Randy
Buckner at Harvard University and the Neuroinformatics Research Group at
Washington University School of Medicine" shall apply to all copies of complete
or substantial portions of the software, including without limitation all
source and executable forms, and on any user documentation.
ok
4. The software has been designed for research purposes only and has not
been approved for clinical use. It has not been reviewed or approved by the
Food and Drug Administration or by any other agency. You acknowledge and agree
that clinical applications are neither recommended nor advised.
Since it seems to be just an advisory, I think it should be ok
5. You are responsible for purchasing any external software that may be
required for the proper running of this software. You also agree that you are
solely responsible for informing your sublicensees, including without
limitation your end-users, of their obligations to secure any such required
permissions. You further agree that you are solely responsible for determining
and divulging the viral nature of any code included in the software.
ok
6. We request that you acknowledge the support of XNAT in publications
that utilize the software such as by "This product includes XNAT, developed by
Randy Buckner at Harvard University and the Neuroinformatics Research Group at
Washington University School of Medicine" and/or by direct citation.
I guess that is the biggest concern. It is common for scientific
software to request citations for works using the software. And I consider it
acceptable since
* it seems to not violate any of the freedoms and "DFSG tests"
* we do consider CC BY-SA 3.0 possibly requiring attribution in form of citation
as DFSG compliant
So, should this be license terms acceptable for inclusion of XNAT into main?
Thanks in advance for feedback
[1] http://www.xnat.org
[2] http://www.xnat.org/about/license.html
--
=------------------------------------------------------------------=
Keep in touch www.onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko www.ohloh.net/accounts/yarikoptic
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature