does MUSIC (cosmology package) qualify as free under DFSG?
hi Debian Legal,
I would like to use the MUSIC cosmological initial conditions software
https://bitbucket.org/ohahn/music
and potentially (no promises) ITP it as a Debian package. [Debian
presently has a much older package with overlapping functionality to
MUSIC: mpgrafic. I would prefer not to use MUSIC until/if it's
free-licensed.]
The problem is that the licence:
https://bitbucket.org/ohahn/music/src/a2f902247a6e8ffb4cddd085f52b8a4024ad8b24/LICENSE
i. has "All rights reserved", which sounds like a clear intention to
state that anything not explicitly permitted is forbidden
ii. does not allow modification
iii. does not allow distribution [conditions on distribution are listed, but that could
be interpreted to mean that *if* you obtain permission from the author to distribute,
*then* this is a constraint/reminder about conditions on the private permission that
you have obtained]
iv. does not allow distribution of modified copies
v. requires obligatory citation of the software and research paper
On point v: the GPL forbids this:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#RequireCitation
"No, this is not permitted under the terms of the GPL."
On the other hand, the same GPL FAQ seems to imply that a citation requirement is legally
invalid. Does it matter if a licence has a non-enforceable (illegal) requirement that people
will generally follow voluntarily (and under academic ethics rather than legal
obligation)? Or rather: would this be accepted under DFSG?
Cheers
Boud
Reply to: