Re: License review: tarsnap
On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 11:58:00PM +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> All,
>
> Is the license below acceptable for inclusion into 'non-free'? It is
> claimed to cover the tarsnap software, see
> https://github.com/Tarsnap/tarsnap and https://www.tarsnap.com/ for
> background.
>
> Regarding RFP/ITP status, there is now a Salsa pipeline building the
> Debian package:
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/jas/tarsnap/
>
> It seems to build. If the license is deemed acceptable for inclusion
> into Debian 'non-free' I plan to upload it, closing this old RFP bug. I
> am guessing that the unusual license may have been regarded as a
> blocker.
>
I'm going to be *very* picky here: a restrictive reading of this might
suggest that only the *exact* software without any modificatin can
be distributed at all.
Packaging the software for Debian amounts to modification: minimal
modification but modification anyway. That presumably means we
can't distribute it at all, even in non-free.
All the very best, as ever,
Andrew Cater
(amacater@debian.org)
> /Simon
>
> Copyright 2006 - 2022 Tarsnap Backup Inc.
> All rights reserved.
>
> Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, without modification,
> is permitted for the sole purpose of using the "tarsnap" backup service
> provided by Tarsnap Backup Inc.
>
> THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
> ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
> IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
> ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
> FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
> DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
> OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
> HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
> LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
> OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
> SUCH DAMAGE.
Reply to: