[opensuse-factory] license questions
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/d5cd80588087a0be898fb1144d9224b7.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Dear all, Project games freeimage is licensed under the FreeImage Public License - Version 1.0 ( http://freeimage.sourceforge.net/freeimage-license.txt ) the problem is that this licence doesn't exist in spdx i.e. in http://license.opensuse.org/ . Does anyone know if this it the correct location to discuss this issue. And how the license should be handled. Another project with a a non existing spdx license is games micropolis. This project has a GPL-3.0+ with ADDITIONAL TERMS per GNU GPL Section 7 ( http://www.donhopkins.com/home/micropolis/ ) Does anyone know what license should be used? Regards, Joop. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/d59cb9321a7a2a3ea5e5790345279ac2.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On 26 April 2013 10:38, Joop Boonen
Dear all,
Project games freeimage is licensed under the FreeImage Public License - Version 1.0 ( http://freeimage.sourceforge.net/freeimage-license.txt ) the problem is that this licence doesn't exist in spdx i.e. in http://license.opensuse.org/ .
Does anyone know if this it the correct location to discuss this issue. And how the license should be handled.
FreeImage can actually be distributed under the GPL2 or 3 according to http://freeimage.sourceforge.net/license.html so I suggest that we move it over to that. Matt -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/5b748275c3dbb1ceee18ed554486547d.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On Friday 2013-04-26 11:38, Joop Boonen wrote:
Another project with a a non existing spdx license is games micropolis. This project has a GPL-3.0+ with ADDITIONAL TERMS per GNU GPL Section 7 ( http://www.donhopkins.com/home/micropolis/ )
Does anyone know what license should be used?
Trademark considerations pretty much apply anytime anyway for any package. The extra section is gratitious information which may help the user to find a conclusion to the question "can the name «XYZ» be used for a Metropolis-derived software?" faster. "GPL-3.0+" for the .spec file's License: field should be sufficient IMO. If not, the legal team will tell you when submitting to Factory. (Remarks: I am not part of the legal group.) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
participants (3)
-
Jan Engelhardt
-
Joop Boonen
-
Matt Williams