Dear list readers!
I got no further response from Ribbonsoft. Is the below statement strong
enough to consider dxflib free?
On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 20:51 +0100, Volker Froehlich wrote:
Thank you for your prompt response.
The problem is, the paragraph in question circumscribes the terms of the
GPL and it fails to do it properly. That's what's causing the problem.
Besides that, the term "Open Source Edition" is not clarified, as far as
I could see.
If the license stated in this file does not apply, can you please remove
it from the tarball and just include a copy of the FSF license instead?
On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 20:36 +0100, Andrew Mustun wrote:
> The dxflib Open Source Edition is licensed under the terms of the
> GPL v2 without anything to add or remove from that.
> The paragraph below is meant to clarify what GPL / Open Source
> means. If your application is released under the GPL v2, the
> commercial license contained in file dxflib_commercial_license.txt
> simply does not apply at all for you.
> Andrew Mustun
> On 10/31/12 8:24 PM, Volker Froehlich wrote:
> > Dear RibbonSoft!
> > I'm a packager with the Fedora GNU/Linux distribution. I'm packaging
> > SAGA GIS (https://sourceforge.net/projects/saga-gis/
), which uses
> > dxflib.
> > I read that the "Open Source Edition" of dxflib was licensed under
> > terms of GPL version 2. While this is clearly stated in the headers of
> > the source code, the file dxflib_commercial_license.txt causes us
> > headache.
> > """
> > NOTE: dxflib Open Source Edition is licensed under the terms of the
> > GPL and not under this Agreement. If Licensee has, at any time,
> > developed all (or any portions of) the Application(s) using RibbonSoft's
> > publicly licensed dxflib Open Source Edition, Licensee must comply
> > with RibbonSoft's requirements and license such Application(s)
> > (or any portions derived there from) under the terms of the Free
> > Software Foundation's GNU General Public License version 2 (the
> > copy of which is located at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html#SEC1
> > (i.e., any Product(s) and/or parts, components, portions thereof
> > developed using GPL licensed software, including dxflib Open Source
> > Edition, must be licensed under the terms of the GPL, and the GPL-based
> > source code must be made available upon request).
> > """
> > Tom Callaway of Red Hat found this statement was not in line with the
> > GPL and therefore non-free:
> > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2011-October/001734.html
> > It'd be great if we could work this out together. A clear license
> > situation would allow to include dxflib in Fedora and other
> > distributions that care about software freedom.
> > Sincerely,
> > Volker Fröhlich
legal mailing list