Strange legal notice in AllJoyn (from Qualcomm)

[Cleto Martín]

Hello!

I'm studying to start a package for AllJoyn[1], a network middleware
created by Qualcomm which is now hosted by the Linux Foundation.

In general terms, this middleware is licensed under the Internet
Software Consortium (ISC) terms, which seems to be good in terms of
Debian Policy. However, I have found this notice within git repository [2]:

---8---

Notice of Export Control Law

Cryptographic software is subject to the US government export control
and economic sanctions laws (“US export laws”) including the US
Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security’s (“BIS”) Export
Administration Regulations (“EAR”, 15 CFR 730 et seq.,
http://www.bis.doc.gov/). You may also be subject to US export laws,
including the requirements of license exception TSU in accordance with
part 740.13(e) of the EAR.  Softwareand/or technical data subject to the
US export laws may not be directly or indirectly exported, reexported,
transferred, or released (“exported”) to US embargoed or sanctioned
destinations currently including Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, or
Syria, but any amendments to this list shall apply. In addition,
software and/or technical data may not be exported to any
entity barred by the US government from participating in export
activities. Denied persons or entities include those listed on BIS’s
Denied Persons and Entities Lists, and the US Department of Treasury’s
Office of Foreign Assets Control’s Specially Designated Nationals List.
 The country in which you are currently located may have restrictions on
the import, possession, use of encryption software. You are responsible
for compliance with the laws where You are located.

---8---

Sounds me like a non-free clause. I have had a look at [3] but I'm not
sure if actually is the same case, so I doubt if I could follow the
procedure explained there. Is this a non-free clause or we have similar
cases in the past?

Many thanks,
 cleto.

[1]: https://www.alljoyn.org
[2]: https://git.allseenalliance.org/cgit/core/alljoyn.git/tree/README.md
[3]: https://www.debian.org/legal/cryptoinmain



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Friking Shark videogame legal issues

[Cleto Martín Angelina]

Hi,

I am studying to package Friking Shark, a remake of a retro videogame
called Flying Shark[1]. In legal terms, source code is not a problem
because is licensed under GLPv3. However, I do not know how I should
consider the sound effects. License.txt talks about this:

Sounds effects are modified versions of sounds purchased at
www.sound-effects-library.com. You can use these sounds for playing
Friking Shark but if you plan to package and distribute the game you
must replace them or contact www.sound-effects-library.com for explicit
permission.

IMHO, this is not DFSG compatible. However, this note was written by
Friking Shark upstream author because he didn't know what kind of
license should be set. In fact, he sent me some emails where sound
effects author said that there is not need to include license.

Obviously, sound-effects-library.com has a Terms of Use[2] where it is
indicated that sound may be modified, but:

The audio samples shall remain the property of Sound Effects Library
Limited or its Library partners and are licensed, not sold to you for
use on your audio equipment.

Also, clause 6 of these terms talks about sounds effects in video games.
I am not sure what is the best solution to sound effects issues in
Friking Shark. Thanks in advance for your help.

[1] http://code.google.com/p/friking-shark/
[2] http://www.sound-effects-library.com/terms.asp

-- 
Cleto Martín Angelina
GPG Key: 00EF5DFB



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature