[Fedora-legal-list] SPDX identifiers for xmag-1.0.7

[Petr Pisar]

Hello,

I'm trying to use SPDX identifiers for xmag-1.0.7 package
<https://www.x.org/archive//individual/app/xmag-1.0.7.tar.xz> and I run into
difficulties with identifying MIT-family licenses.

Specifically, two of them:

CutPaste.c file reads:

	Copyright 1989, 1998  The Open Group

	Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute, and sell this software and its
	documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee, provided that
	the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that both that
	copyright notice and this permission notice appear in supporting
	documentation.

	The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included
	in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

	THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
	OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
	MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.
	IN NO EVENT SHALL THE OPEN GROUP BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR
	OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE,
	ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
	OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

	Except as contained in this notice, the name of The Open Group shall
	not be used in advertising or otherwise to promote the sale, use or
	other dealings in this Software without prior written authorization
	from The Open Group.

That's clearly MIT-open-group <https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT-open-group.html>
license. But Fedora's license list in
/usr/share/fedora-license-data/licenses/fedora-licenses.json distributed
within fedora-license-data-1.0-1.fc37 does not recognize this identifier.

Could legal team look at this license, add the identifier to the Fedora
database, and decide whether it is acceptable for Fedora packages?


Then CutPaste.h file reads:

	Copyright (C) 1999 The XFree86 Project, Inc.  All Rights Reserved.

	Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
	of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to
	deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the
	rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or
	sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
	furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

	The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
	all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

	THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
	IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
	FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.  IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
	XFREE86 PROJECT BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER
	IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN
	CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

	Except as contained in this notice, the name of the XFree86 Project shall
	not be used in advertising or otherwise to promote the sale, use or other
	dealings in this Software without prior written authorization from the
	XFree86 Project.

It looks like MIT <https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html> license except the file
has an additional "Except as contained..." paragraph. Is it "MIT"
license? Or
is it a different one from a <https://spdx.org/licenses/> list? Or is it
a completely new variant?


Please note that both these licenses are not new to xmag package. They were
there probably from the very first days of Fedora. So far I postponed
converting xmag Fedora package to SPDX syntax. That will mask these issues,
but I'd like to solve them sooner than later to be ready when SPDX syntax
becomes mandatory.

-- Petr