1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.LEGAL

  • Is this BSD-3-Clause Variant DFSG-compliant?

    From Eriberto Mota@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 24 18:40:01 2020
    Hi folks,

    Today I found the file test/ftp.y, in btyacc package, using the
    following license:

    test/ftp.y: * Copyright (c) 1985, 1988 Regents of the University of California. test/ftp.y- * All rights reserved.
    test/ftp.y- *
    test/ftp.y- * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted test/ftp.y: * provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are test/ftp.y- * duplicated in all such forms and that any documentation, test/ftp.y- * advertising materials, and other materials related to such test/ftp.y- * distribution and use acknowledge that the software was developed test/ftp.y- * by the University of California, Berkeley. The name of the test/ftp.y- * University may not be used to endorse or promote products derived test/ftp.y- * from this software without specific prior written permission. test/ftp.y- * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND WITHOUT ANY EXPRESS OR test/ftp.y- * IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED test/ftp.y- * WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A
    PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

    For me it is not DFSG-compatible because I can't see a clause about
    allowing modifications in source code. However, I found several
    packages[1] in main section using this license.

    [1] https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=duplicated+in+all+such+forms+and+that+any+documentation%2C+advertising&literal=1

    Regards,

    Eriberto

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Wise@21:1/5 to All on Mon May 25 06:30:01 2020
    On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 4:34 PM Eriberto Mota wrote:

    For me it is not DFSG-compatible because I can't see a clause about
    allowing modifications in source code.

    I brought this up on debian-legal a while ago:

    https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/a8259f8fb4348c790076ffcaf8721ecba7c714a3.camel@debian.org

    Since then I talked to one of RedHat's lawyers and they mentioned that
    they have dealt with this problem too and concluded that these
    licenses were intended to cover modification. The current wording of
    the initial part of the BSD license reflects an attempt to correct an
    earlier mistake (i.e. someone pointed out the error and Berkeley added
    "with or without modification"). Also note that the anti-endorsement
    clause implies a right to modify.

    --
    bye,
    pabs

    https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)