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

Re: Bug#875876: RFS: python-dtcwt/0.12.0-1

The copyright you quoted applies to the code from the original implementation in MATLAB.

This code is a complete rewrite in Python, so the original copyright should not apply. Not sure why this file is provided since the two code bases are different.

Anyway I am open to hear from a second opinion from d-legal.


Le 16 sept. 2017 11:20, "Herbert Fortes" <terberh@gmail.com> a écrit :
Hi Ghislain Vaillant,

> Package: sponsorship-requests
> Severity: normal
> Dear mentors,
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-dtcwt"
> * Package name    : python-dtcwt
>   Version         : 0.12.0-1
>   Upstream Author : Rich Wareham <rich.github@richwareham.com>
> * URL             : https://github.com/rjw57/dtcwt
> * License         : BSD
>   Section         : science

Cc: debian-legal

python-dtcwt is in Debian since 2015, but ORIGINAL_README.txt[0]
file is a bit problematic. I need someone to do a second check on

[0] - https://anonscm.debian.org/git/debian-science/packages/python-dtcwt.git/tree/ORIGINAL_README.txt

It is said:

"This code is copyright and is supplied free of charge for research
purposes only. In return for supplying the code, all I ask is that, if
you use the algorithms, you give due reference to this work in any
papers that you write and that you let me know if you find any good
applications for the DT CWT. If the applications are good, I would be
very interested in collaboration. I accept no liability arising from use
of these algorithms."

 - ... free of charge for research only ...
 - ... all I ask is ... let me know if you find any good ...

The package is BSD, but COPYING.txt file says:

"This licence applies to any parts of this library which are novel in comparison
to the original DTCWT MATLAB toolbox written by Nick Kingsbury and Cian
Shaffrey. See the ORIGINAL_README.txt file for details on any further
restrictions of use."

It does not look to be in "main" to me.


Reply to: