Issue 99 in gpick: gpick contains file with potentially non-free license

[gp...@googlecode.com]

Status: New
Owner: ----
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium

New issue 99 by vincent....@gmail.com: gpick contains file with potentially
non-free license
http://code.google.com/p/gpick/issues/detail?id=99

The share/gpick/colors.txt file is using a license with this:

5. These RGB colour formulations may not be used to the detriment of
Resene Paints Ltd.

This is not compatible with OSD (http://opensource.org/osd) and I'm not
sure this would qualify as a free license.

Could this possibly be fixed somehow (either by talking to Resene, or by
not using this data)?

[gp...@googlecode.com]

Updates:
Status: Reviewed
Owner: thezbyg

Comment #1 on issue 99 by thezbyg: gpick contains file with potentially
non-free license
http://code.google.com/p/gpick/issues/detail?id=99

If this is a packaging issue, then a simple 'rm share/gpick/colors.txt',
executed before building, will get rid of that file. End-users will not
have any problems, apart from reduced number of color names, because Gpick
silently ignores missing color name files.

Scribus is using Resene palettes with the same license for over a year now,
so either nobody noticed, or this is a non-issue.

I am not a lawyer, so I am not qualified to decide if their license
complies with OSD or not.

[gp...@googlecode.com]

Comment #2 on issue 99 by vincent....@gmail.com: gpick contains file with

potentially non-free license
http://code.google.com/p/gpick/issues/detail?id=99

I know I can do a simple rm. My worry is more that it probably makes the
whole tarball not totally free.

Would it be possible to make this data downloadable at runtime instead, for
instance?

(For scribus: our maintainers did notice, but in the end, I think they just
dropped the file in the packaging, which is suboptimal)

[gp...@googlecode.com]

Comment #3 on issue 99 by thezbyg: gpick contains file with potentially
non-free license
http://code.google.com/p/gpick/issues/detail?id=99

I could make that file downloadable at runtime, but it would still be
optional (controlled by build-time parameter), because it just doesn't make
any sense to add additional dependencies for a download of a single file.

The tarball would still include that file, but if this somehow infects the
whole tarball, then I could provide a separate tarballs without that
questionable file.

[gp...@googlecode.com]

Comment #4 on issue 99 by thezbyg: gpick contains file with potentially
non-free license
http://code.google.com/p/gpick/issues/detail?id=99

Download at runtime option added in revision b7dccff730af.