Martin Steigerwald <[email protected]> writes: > On packaging fs_mark I found > > 8 * Copyright (c) 2000 Carl Staelin. > 9 * Copyright (c) 1994-1998 Larry McVoy. > 10 * Distributed under the FSF GPL with > 11 * additional restriction that results may published only if > 12 * (1) the benchmark is unmodified, and > 13 * (2) the version in the sccsid below is included in the report.
No version of the GPL is specified. That's often taken to mean “whatever version you, the recipient, choose”. I don't know how well that would hold up if challenged. These additions are not compatible with the GPL which, in GPLv3 §10 says “You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted or affirmed under this License.” > Is this restriction DFSG compliant? It's not only not compliant with the DFSG; it's not compliant with the GPL itself. So the recipient has no effective grant of license to redistribute. I hope you can contact upstream and notify them that the terms do not grant effective license to any recipient, and encourage them to remove those additional restrictions. -- \ “The cost of education is trivial compared to the cost of | `\ ignorance.” —Thomas Jefferson | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
