Re: Bug#964815: it looks like dprof2calltree cannot be distributed with a GPL-2 work
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 06:33:32PM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>
> Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 03:38:57PM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> >>...
> >> * Neither name of the company nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
> >>
> >> I'm not 100% certain that bundling dprof2calltree with kcachegrind constitutes a "product[s] derived from this software", because I'm also of the opinion that bundling != derivation, but it seems like a lawyer might argue the it does. So kcachegrind and any distributions' package would also need written persmission from OmniTI Computer Consulting.
> >>...
> >
> > You are arguing the 3-Clause BSD License would be non-free?
>
> No, because dprof2calltree is modified 4-Clause BSD.
dprof2calltree uses a verbatim copy of 4-Clause BSD
(except for filling the company placeholders).
This clause is one of the 3 clauses that are identical in 3-clause and
4-clause BSD.
> > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 03:53:48PM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> >>...
> >> At the very least, it appears that the advertising clauses make
> >> dprof2calltree not DFSG-free,
> >
> > It does not:
> > https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/
> >
> >> because they fail the "desert island test".
> >>...
> >
> > It does not.
> >
> > If you choose to advertise the use of this software on your desert
> > island, you have to include the acknowledgement in your advertisement.
>
> It fails the "desert island test" because
>
> 1. Any mention of the features or use of this software requires
> user-facing display of the text "This product includes software
> developed by OmniTI Computer Consulting".
>
> 2. OmniTI Computer Consulting's name cannot be used to "without specific
> prior written permission"
>
> The desert island does not have the paper snailmail service required to
> fulfil #2 (4th clause of the license).
The 4-clause BSD license is around for 30 years, everyone else
(including the FSF[1]) does not interpret it the way you do
that there would be a conflict between these two clauses.
> Regards,
> Nicholas
cu
Adrian
[1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#OriginalBSD
Reply to: