[Fedora-legal-list] Documentation and header files seemingly without a license

[Ville-Pekka Vainio]

Hi,

I'm reviewing erlang-bitcask for Fedora:
<https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652623>. A good way of
browsing through upstream source is here:
<https://bitbucket.org/basho/bitcask/src>.

Upstream doesn't have a LICENSE file or similar and the license is not
mentioned in the README file either. I have two licensing related
questions:

1. All other relevant source files have a license header except
include/bitcask.hrl and c_src/erl_nif_compat.h. I'm not sure if they
constitute a "work" in terms of copyright and should have licenses. What
do you think?

2. This is, to me, the more important question. There is a .pdf file and
some .png files in the doc directory. To me these seem like works which
are under copyright, but I can't find a license for them anywhere in the
source tree. Does this make them non-free and non-redistributable?

-- 
Ville-Pekka Vainio