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

Re: freeness and compatibility of CeCILL-C licence

Drew Parsons writes ("freeness and compatibility of CeCILL-C licence"):
> There are various discussions about the status of the CeCILL-C licence
> v1 (and other CeCILL licences) in the history of this mailing list. 
> It's not listed at https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/
> but when it last came up on this list, Thibaut Paumard suggested it's
> fine, LGPL compatible, 
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2010/01/msg00064.html
> Is this still the consensus?
> CeCILL-C v1 itself is http://www.cecill.info/licences/Licence_CeCILL-C_V1-en.html

I think this is a DFSG-free GPL-incompatible copyleft licence.

Francesco Poli dislikes the choice of law and courts clause, but I
think it's fine.  (IMO it would not be fine if it specified Russian or
Chinese courts.)

It's GPL-incompatible because it is not identical to the GPL and
requires derivatives to have the same licence.

The warranty disclaimer clauses are unusually worded but seem to
protect contributors (including third parties) well enough.


Reply to: