[opensuse-packaging] Licence when software doesn't specifies one.
In Internet sometimes you find software available from the author webpage, with the source code available... but without specifying a licence. Even if you try to contact with the author he often doesn't knows nothing about GPL, licence compatibility, etc. What can/should we do in these cases if we want to package his software? I understand than even if he hasn't specified a licence he is the copyright holder and so I can't redistribute his software without permision. An easy solution is to recommend him the GPL. But a lot of them want a licence that: a) Is "free". Allowing the redistribution at no cost. b) Does *not* allows "commerical" use. c) Requires any redistribution to make reference to the original author. Such a software can be hosted in the OBS? Is "Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike" a good option? I suppose it is GPL incompatible. If he accepts to licence under <licence>. How can I prove that he allowed me to redistribute the software under that licence? I need to ask him to modify the files hosted in his website adding the licence? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 15:01 +0100, Christian Morales Vega wrote:
Is "Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike" a good option? I suppose it is GPL incompatible.
Creative Commoms licenses for software are pretty bad, to not say unapplicable. Hub --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On 2008-02-04 09:18:01 -0500, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 15:01 +0100, Christian Morales Vega wrote:
Is "Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike" a good option? I suppose it is GPL incompatible.
Creative Commoms licenses for software are pretty bad, to not say unapplicable.
why? darix -- openSUSE - SUSE Linux is my linux openSUSE is good for you www.opensuse.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 16:33 +0100, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
On 2008-02-04 09:18:01 -0500, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 15:01 +0100, Christian Morales Vega wrote:
Is "Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike" a good option? I suppose it is GPL incompatible.
Creative Commoms licenses for software are pretty bad, to not say unapplicable.
why?
See the CC faq. http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ#Can_I_use_a_Creative_Commons_license_for... Hub --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 04 February 2008, Christian Morales Vega wrote:
An easy solution is to recommend him the GPL. But a lot of them want a licence that: a) Is "free". Allowing the redistribution at no cost. b) Does *not* allows "commerical" use.
GPL does not forbid commercial use. It however makes sure that your rights are preserved if used commercially. I think thats what the author actually wants, but you probably want to double check that. But even LGPL does enforce that already.
c) Requires any redistribution to make reference to the original author.
That sounds like the advertising clause in BSD or similar. This is according to FSF's view incompatible with the GPL. I'm not able to judge if that view is justified or not. It does have a bad smell though. To me at least.
If he accepts to licence under <licence>. How can I prove that he allowed me to redistribute the software under that licence? I need to ask him to modify the files hosted in his website adding the licence?
The latter would be preferrable indeed, but adding a LICENSE file stating the exact terms and installing it as part of the package would be the minimum, IMHO. Greetings, Dirk -- RPMLINT information under http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/RpmLint --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
2008/2/4, Dirk Mueller
On Monday 04 February 2008, Christian Morales Vega wrote:
An easy solution is to recommend him the GPL. But a lot of them want a licence that: a) Is "free". Allowing the redistribution at no cost. b) Does *not* allows "commerical" use.
GPL does not forbid commercial use. It however makes sure that your rights are preserved if used commercially. I think thats what the author actually wants, but you probably want to double check that. But even LGPL does enforce that already.
Well, what people often says is: "if someone is going to make commerical use/distribution of my software I also want to receive a part of the money".
c) Requires any redistribution to make reference to the original author.
That sounds like the advertising clause in BSD or similar. This is according to FSF's view incompatible with the GPL. I'm not able to judge if that view is justified or not. It does have a bad smell though. To me at least.
If he accepts to licence under <licence>. How can I prove that he allowed me to redistribute the software under that licence? I need to ask him to modify the files hosted in his website adding the licence?
The latter would be preferrable indeed, but adding a LICENSE file stating the exact terms and installing it as part of the package would be the minimum, IMHO.
Greetings, Dirk
-- RPMLINT information under http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/RpmLint --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org
-- The best way to accelerate a computer running Windows is at 9.81 m/s² Jabber: reddwarf <arroba> jabber.org Teléfono SIP: sip:christian.morales.vega <arroba> ekiga.net sip:608608 <arroba> ekiga.net
participants (4)
-
Christian Morales Vega -
Dirk Mueller -
Hubert Figuiere -
Marcus Rueckert