Hi Julian, On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 11:21:08PM +0200, Julian Taylor wrote: > hi, > I was asked by ftp-masters to clarify the status of some files in the > scipy package [0] > The files are are simple serialized numeric arrays created by the > proprietary program IDL. They are used as testcases for a reverse > engineered implementation the de/serialization in the python scipy package. > The data in the files are just a couple random numbers in a certain > format and should not fall under any copyright. > The issue seems to be that reverse engineering is not allowed by IDL's > EULA as the files contain following header: > IDL Save/Restore files embody unpublished proprietary information > about the IDL program. Reverse engineering of this file is therefore > forbidden under the terms of the IDL End User License Agreement > (IDL EULA). All IDL users are required to read and agree to the > terms of the IDL EULA at the time that they install IDL. > Software that reads or writes files in the IDL Save/Restore format > must have a license from ITT Visual Information Solutions > explicitly granting the right to do so. In this case, the license > will be included with the software for your inspection. Please > report software that does not have such a license to > ITT Visual Information Solutions (info@ittvis.com). > The io code itself is DFSG free. > Is there any issue in packaging and distributing this code and these > simple testcase? > A user may not be able to use the code legally, but on the other hand > he/she probably also never accepted IDL's EULA as IDL is not being used. > To me this notice hardly has any legal relevance at all and should not > be an issue for packaging. > I have inquired upstream about this and according to a comment in the > source it was apparently written with permission of ITT Visual > Information Solutions, but the exact correspondence has not turned up yet. A couple points here: - In many jurisdictions (definitely in the US, and IIRC in the EU), prohibitions on reverse engineering are null and void. - In the event that such a prohibition on reverse engineering does have legal force, the author would be in violation of the EULA; but this does not imply that, once created, there is any liability on the part of the distributor or the user. We should not a priori block software from inclusion in Debian just because it has been reverse-engineered in apparent contravention of an EULA. It's for the courts to determine if such a work infringes copyright of the original. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature