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

Re: licensing question for "nom.tam.fits"



On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:37:46 +0200 Florian Rothmaier wrote:

> Hi to everyone involved in debian-legal,

Hello!

> 
> I've got a licensing issue related to the astronomical Java library
> "fits" ("nom.tam.fits") from Thomas McGlynn.
> 
> The newest release can be obtained at:
> http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/heasarc/fits/java/v1.0/v1.08.1/ .
> 
> In the code, I find the following copyright statement:
> /* Copyright: Thomas McGlynn 1997-1999.
>  * This code may be used for any purpose, non-commercial
>  * or commercial so long as this copyright notice is retained
>  * in the source code or included in or referred to in any
>  * derived software.
>  */
> When I wrote an e-mail to Thomas McGlynn, he replied:
> "I believe the lines you quote are themselves the entirety of the
> license. There was no intent to associate this with any specific more
> general license."

Unfortunately these "license lines" do not seem to be enough to make the
library clearly Free Software.
I think they are far too vague and implicit:

  - the term "use" is ambiguous at best; does it just cover running a
    program that links with library? or is it implicitly intended to
    also cover other activities such as copying, modification,
    redistribution of verbatim and modified copies?

  - there's no explicit permission to copy and redistribute

  - there is a reference to derived software, but no explicit
    permission to create and distribute such derived software

I believe that such "license lines" make the library unsuitable for
distribution in Debian (main) or even in the non-free archive.

> 
> Now, I'm not sure how to proceed.
[...]
> I'd appreciate your help!

If you want this library to be included in Debian, I think you should
contact its copyright holder again and persuade him to re-license the
library in a clearly DFSG-free manner, preferably under the terms of a
well known and widely used Free Software license.

I would personally recommend the copyright holder to re-license the
library under the terms of the Expat/MIT license [1], which is very
simple and similar in spirit to the goals that were probably in the
mind of the drafter of the above quoted "license lines".

[1] http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt

> 
> Thanks in advance

You're welcome, I hope this helps.

> and please cc me in your replies since I'm not
> subscribed to "debian-legal".

Done.

Bye and good luck with your persuasion effort!


-- 
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt
 New GnuPG key, see the transition document!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

Attachment: pgpk2QFnMGBt1.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: