Hi!
I'd like to package the openlibm library [1] which is a dependency of the Julia language [2]. The original license of the project, besides later contributions which are under BSD and MIT licenses, is an apparently custom license whose text is as follows (see [3]):
Copyright (C) 1993 by Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved.
Developed at SunPro, a Sun Microsystems, Inc. business. Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software is freely granted, provided that this notice is preserved.
The text looks like slightly contradictory since it starts stating "All rights reserved" before granting the rights to do mostly anything you want with the code given the license is preserved. I guess it is OK to ship it, but I would like a confirmation for more clued people.
As a secondary point, how should I indicate the license in the License field of the .spec file? FDLIBM and BSD and MIT?
Regards
1: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040517 2: https://github.com/JuliaLang/openlibm/ 3: https://github.com/JuliaLang/openlibm/blob/master/LICENSE.md
On 12/25/2013 03:52 PM, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
Hi!
I'd like to package the openlibm library [1] which is a dependency of the Julia language [2]. The original license of the project, besides later contributions which are under BSD and MIT licenses, is an apparently custom license whose text is as follows (see [3]):
Copyright (C) 1993 by Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved.
Developed at SunPro, a Sun Microsystems, Inc. business. Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software is freely granted, provided that this notice is preserved.
The text looks like slightly contradictory since it starts stating "All rights reserved" before granting the rights to do mostly anything you want with the code given the license is preserved. I guess it is OK to ship it, but I would like a confirmation for more clued people.
As a secondary point, how should I indicate the license in the License field of the .spec file? FDLIBM and BSD and MIT?
"All Rights Reserved" is a Legalese no-op (it used to mean something once, but post-Berne convention, it doesn't mean anything). You can ignore it entirely.
Let's just call that SunPro license MIT and move on. It isn't unique enough to merit a new license name.
~tom
== ¸.·´¯`·.´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸><(((º> OSAS @ Red Hat University Outreach || Fedora Special Projects || Fedora Legal
Le lundi 30 décembre 2013 à 12:51 -0500, Tom Callaway a écrit :
On 12/25/2013 03:52 PM, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
Hi!
I'd like to package the openlibm library [1] which is a dependency of the Julia language [2]. The original license of the project, besides later contributions which are under BSD and MIT licenses, is an apparently custom license whose text is as follows (see [3]):
Copyright (C) 1993 by Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved.
Developed at SunPro, a Sun Microsystems, Inc. business. Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software is freely granted, provided that this notice is preserved.
The text looks like slightly contradictory since it starts stating "All rights reserved" before granting the rights to do mostly anything you want with the code given the license is preserved. I guess it is OK to ship it, but I would like a confirmation for more clued people.
As a secondary point, how should I indicate the license in the License field of the .spec file? FDLIBM and BSD and MIT?
"All Rights Reserved" is a Legalese no-op (it used to mean something once, but post-Berne convention, it doesn't mean anything). You can ignore it entirely.
Let's just call that SunPro license MIT and move on. It isn't unique enough to merit a new license name.
Cool, thanks for the help!
-
Milan Bouchet-Valat -
Tom Callaway