Ace,

The license preamble for Snort 3.0 provides some pretty concrete 
examples of what we consider to be derivative works.  While it's not an 
exhaustive list and I don't think an exhaustive list is possible - the 
preamble and Marty's public comments provide pretty clear guidance that 
if you're modifying and/or redistributing Snort you should be adhering 
to the terms of the GPL and licensing that project/product under GPL.

If you'd like to contact me either on the snort-users list or off list 
and provide the specific scenario like David did, I'm happy to discuss 
it and weigh in on the specifics.  If I can't answer the question I'll 
get the answer.

I will make the same promise to anyone else who has questions about 
integrating Snort or ClamAV.

My contact information is:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Direct - (410)423-1930


Mike

Ace Nimrod wrote:
> Mike,
> 
> It would be very much appreciated if this could get answered.  I've asked
> for clarification on what Sourcefire constitutes a derivative of Snort as
> even the Snort 3.0 license doesn't really clarify this.
> 
> I'm sure others would appreciate the answer as well.  Sourcefire is the only
> one who can tell us what they think constitutes a derivative that would
> prompt legal action.  And getting this information out in the open could
> prevent wasted time for Sourcefire as well as Snort and ClamAV integrators.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> On 8/17/07, Mike Guiterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>> David,
>>
>> Here is the part where I tell everyone that I am not a lawyer and do not
>> play one on TV.  Which means that IMHO unfortunately does not count. I
>> am happy to get the right person to answer your question and respond.
>>
>> You're right that ensuring everyone's copyright is respected is
>> critical.  Tomasz or another member of the team is probably in a better
>> position to answer that one.
>>
>> David F. Skoll wrote:
>>> Mike Guiterman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Commercial Licensing:  Today ClamAv is used in a number of commercial
>>>> solutions.  ClamAV will continue to be licensed under GPL to vendors
>>>> that distribute the derivative products under the GPL.
>>> OK, sounds good.  Question: We ship ClamAV (plus source as required by
>> GPL)
>>> with a commercial (non-GPL) product.  We make use of ClamAV only
>>> through the clamdscan interface over a socket.  Do you consider that
>>> to be a "derivative product"?  I do not, but I'd like to know where you
>>> stand.
>>>
>>>> The intention is to make ClamAV available under a commercial license as
>> well.
>>> How will you be sure you have removed all contributed code whose
>> copyright
>>> is not owned by Sourcefire?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> David.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
>>> http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
>> --
>> Mike Guiterman
>>
>> Snort Community Manager
>>
>> Sourcefire, Inc.
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> (410)423-1930
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
>> http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
> http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html

-- 
Mike Guiterman

Snort Community Manager

Sourcefire, Inc.

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

(410)423-1930

_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html

Reply via email to