[Fedora-legal-list] dcraw.c licensing ambiguity

[Nils Philippsen]

Hi Dave,

I'm the Fedora/Red Hat Enterprise Linux package maintainer for dcraw and
when going over the licenses of some of my packages I found that the
licensing blurb of dcraw.c has changed like this ("-": old, "+": new
version):

--- 8< ---
-   Attention!  Some parts of this program are restricted under the
-   terms of the GNU General Public License.  Such code is enclosed
-   in "BEGIN GPL BLOCK" and "END GPL BLOCK" declarations.
-   Any code not declared GPL is free for all uses.
+   No license is required to download and use dcraw.c.  However,
+   to lawfully redistribute this code, you must either (a) include
+   full source code* for all executable files containing RESTRICTED
+   functions, (b) remove all RESTRICTED functions, re-implement them,
+   or copy them from an earlier, unrestricted Revision of dcraw.c,
+   or (c) purchase a license from the author.
 
-   Starting in Revision 1.237, the code to support Foveon cameras
-   is under GPL.
+   The functions that process Foveon images have been RESTRICTED
+   since Revision 1.237.  All other code remains free for all uses.
 
-   To lawfully redistribute dcraw.c, you must either (a) include
-   full source code for all executable files containing restricted
-   functions, (b) remove these functions, re-implement them, or
-   copy them from an earlier, non-GPL Revision of dcraw.c, or (c)
-   purchase a license from the author.
+   *If you have not modified dcraw.c in any way, a link to my
+   homepage qualifies as "full source code".
--- >8 ---

With the upcoming Fedora version 8, we want all packages' licensing
terms be listed in the package (e.g. "GPLv2+" for GNU GPL Version 2 or
later"). Now I'm a bit unsure about what to do about the terms of
dcraw.c and whether they are still GPL compatible(*) and so forth.

(*): IIRC, GPL allows distribution of a binary without source code but a
written offer to ship it on request. The source code provisions in the
dcraw terms might be "additional restrictions" that aren't GPL
compatible.

Would you please shed some light on this? I'd very much appreciate it.

Thanks in advance,
Nils
-- 
     Nils Philippsen    /    Red Hat    /    nphilipp at redhat.com
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary
 Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."  --  B. Franklin, 1759
 PGP fingerprint:  C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011