Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Bug#697848: non-free files in main
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Ansgar Burchardt
Jan 10, 2013, 6:50:01 AM1/10/13
to
Package: src:ace
Severity: serious
Hi,
the following license conditions (from 6.1.2-1's d/copyright) look quite
non-free as they restrict how the program may be modified:
----
[...] You
may copy and extend functionality (but may not remove functionality)
of the Interface Definition Language CFE without charge, but you are
not authorized to license or distribute it to anyone else except as
part of a product or program developed by you or with the express
written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun").
----
----
You may copy, modify, distribute, or sublicense the LICENSED PRODUCT
without charge as part of a product or software program developed by
you, so long as you preserve the functionality of interoperating with
the Object Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol" version
one. However, any uses other than the foregoing uses shall require
the express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
----
There's also a license allowing only educational and commercial use, but no
redistribution or modification:
----
All of the files in these directories are copyright Addison Wesley,
and they come with absolutely no warranty whatsoever. Permission is
hereby granted to use these programs for educational or commercial
purposes.
----
Ansgar
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Severity: serious
Hi,
the following license conditions (from 6.1.2-1's d/copyright) look quite
non-free as they restrict how the program may be modified:
----
[...] You
may copy and extend functionality (but may not remove functionality)
of the Interface Definition Language CFE without charge, but you are
not authorized to license or distribute it to anyone else except as
part of a product or program developed by you or with the express
written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun").
----
----
You may copy, modify, distribute, or sublicense the LICENSED PRODUCT
without charge as part of a product or software program developed by
you, so long as you preserve the functionality of interoperating with
the Object Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol" version
one. However, any uses other than the foregoing uses shall require
the express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
----
There's also a license allowing only educational and commercial use, but no
redistribution or modification:
----
All of the files in these directories are copyright Addison Wesley,
and they come with absolutely no warranty whatsoever. Permission is
hereby granted to use these programs for educational or commercial
purposes.
----
Ansgar
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Thomas Girard
Jan 15, 2013, 3:30:03 PM1/15/13
to
Hello,
thanks for the report.
On 10/01/2013 12:30, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Package: src:ace
> Severity: serious
[...]
> the following license conditions (from 6.1.2-1's d/copyright) look quite
> non-free as they restrict how the program may be modified:
I assume you are referring to DFSG#3 here? Or DFSG#1?
> ----
> [...] You
> may copy and extend functionality (but may not remove functionality)
> of the Interface Definition Language CFE without charge, but you are
> not authorized to license or distribute it to anyone else except as
> part of a product or program developed by you or with the express
> written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun").
> ----
My reading of the text above is that it's possible to license or
distribute IDL CFE to anyone if:
- the licensee has express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
("Sun"); or
- it's part of a product or program developed by the licensee
While first condition is impossible to meet, the second one looks
similar (to me) to DFSG#1.
But maybe the issue here is the /but may not remove functionality/
sentence?
> ----
> You may copy, modify, distribute, or sublicense the LICENSED PRODUCT
> without charge as part of a product or software program developed by
> you, so long as you preserve the functionality of interoperating with
> the Object Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol" version
> one. However, any uses other than the foregoing uses shall require
> the express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> ----
Likewise, I don't see what's wrong here, except maybe for /so long as
Is this the part that triggered this bug report?
> There's also a license allowing only educational and commercial use, but no
> redistribution or modification:
>
> ----
> All of the files in these directories are copyright Addison Wesley,
> and they come with absolutely no warranty whatsoever. Permission is
> hereby granted to use these programs for educational or commercial
> purposes.
> ----
Ack. Repackaging would solve this one.
Thanks,
Regards,
Thomas
thanks for the report.
On 10/01/2013 12:30, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Package: src:ace
> Severity: serious
> the following license conditions (from 6.1.2-1's d/copyright) look quite
> non-free as they restrict how the program may be modified:
> ----
> [...] You
> may copy and extend functionality (but may not remove functionality)
> of the Interface Definition Language CFE without charge, but you are
> not authorized to license or distribute it to anyone else except as
> part of a product or program developed by you or with the express
> written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun").
> ----
distribute IDL CFE to anyone if:
- the licensee has express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
("Sun"); or
- it's part of a product or program developed by the licensee
While first condition is impossible to meet, the second one looks
similar (to me) to DFSG#1.
But maybe the issue here is the /but may not remove functionality/
sentence?
> ----
> You may copy, modify, distribute, or sublicense the LICENSED PRODUCT
> without charge as part of a product or software program developed by
> you, so long as you preserve the functionality of interoperating with
> the Object Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol" version
> one. However, any uses other than the foregoing uses shall require
> the express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> ----
you preserve the functionality of interoperating with the Object
Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol"/
Is this the part that triggered this bug report?
> There's also a license allowing only educational and commercial use, but no
> redistribution or modification:
>
> ----
> All of the files in these directories are copyright Addison Wesley,
> and they come with absolutely no warranty whatsoever. Permission is
> hereby granted to use these programs for educational or commercial
> purposes.
> ----
Thanks,
Regards,
Thomas
Ansgar Burchardt
Jan 23, 2013, 12:40:02 PM1/23/13
to
Hi,
On 01/15/2013 21:24, Thomas Girard wrote:
>> the following license conditions (from 6.1.2-1's d/copyright) look quite
>> non-free as they restrict how the program may be modified:
>
> I assume you are referring to DFSG#3 here? Or DFSG#1?
I mean DFSG#3.
>> ----
>> [...] You
>> may copy and extend functionality (but may not remove functionality)
>> of the Interface Definition Language CFE without charge, but you are
>> not authorized to license or distribute it to anyone else except as
>> part of a product or program developed by you or with the express
>> written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun").
>> ----
>
> My reading of the text above is that it's possible to license or
> distribute IDL CFE to anyone if:
>
> - the licensee has express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> ("Sun"); or
> - it's part of a product or program developed by the licensee
>
> While first condition is impossible to meet, the second one looks
> similar (to me) to DFSG#1.
>
> But maybe the issue here is the /but may not remove functionality/
> sentence?
Yes. I believe that is a non-free restriction: I want to be able to
remove functionality if I don't like it (say it is an antifeature[1]).
[1] <http://www.fsf.org/bulletin/2007/fall/antifeatures/>
>> ----
>> You may copy, modify, distribute, or sublicense the LICENSED PRODUCT
>> without charge as part of a product or software program developed by
>> you, so long as you preserve the functionality of interoperating with
>> the Object Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol" version
>> one. However, any uses other than the foregoing uses shall require
>> the express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>> ----
>
> Likewise, I don't see what's wrong here, except maybe for /so long as
> you preserve the functionality of interoperating with the Object
> Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol"/
>
> Is this the part that triggered this bug report?
It's the restriction how one may modify it. For example I am not allowed
to implement a modified protocol (or a newer version) if that
means it would no longer be compatible to the version one. Or to use
parts of the code to implement something totally different.
Ansgar
On 01/15/2013 21:24, Thomas Girard wrote:
>> the following license conditions (from 6.1.2-1's d/copyright) look quite
>> non-free as they restrict how the program may be modified:
>
> I assume you are referring to DFSG#3 here? Or DFSG#1?
>> ----
>> [...] You
>> may copy and extend functionality (but may not remove functionality)
>> of the Interface Definition Language CFE without charge, but you are
>> not authorized to license or distribute it to anyone else except as
>> part of a product or program developed by you or with the express
>> written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun").
>> ----
>
> My reading of the text above is that it's possible to license or
> distribute IDL CFE to anyone if:
>
> - the licensee has express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> ("Sun"); or
> - it's part of a product or program developed by the licensee
>
> While first condition is impossible to meet, the second one looks
> similar (to me) to DFSG#1.
>
> But maybe the issue here is the /but may not remove functionality/
> sentence?
remove functionality if I don't like it (say it is an antifeature[1]).
[1] <http://www.fsf.org/bulletin/2007/fall/antifeatures/>
>> ----
>> You may copy, modify, distribute, or sublicense the LICENSED PRODUCT
>> without charge as part of a product or software program developed by
>> you, so long as you preserve the functionality of interoperating with
>> the Object Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol" version
>> one. However, any uses other than the foregoing uses shall require
>> the express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>> ----
>
> Likewise, I don't see what's wrong here, except maybe for /so long as
> you preserve the functionality of interoperating with the Object
> Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol"/
>
> Is this the part that triggered this bug report?
to implement a modified protocol (or a newer version) if that
means it would no longer be compatible to the version one. Or to use
parts of the code to implement something totally different.
Ansgar
Debian Bug Tracking System
Jan 26, 2013, 6:30:01 AM1/26/13
to
Your message dated Sat, 26 Jan 2013 11:18:14 +0000
with message-id <E1Tz3m2-...@franck.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#697848: fixed in ace 6.0.3+dfsg-0.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #697848,
regarding non-free files in main
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
697848: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=697848
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
with message-id <E1Tz3m2-...@franck.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#697848: fixed in ace 6.0.3+dfsg-0.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #697848,
regarding non-free files in main
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
697848: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=697848
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
0 new messages