Follow-up Comment #6, task #10626 (project administration): Karl has already given his expert opinion, which by the way is authoritative. Let me offer my amateur reading of the situation, based on official GNU documents; maybe it can help with the practical aspects.
According to the GPLv2 <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html>: _You should also get your employer (if you work as a programmer) or your school, if any, to sign a "copyright disclaimer" for the program, if necessary. Here is a sample; alter the names: Yoyodyne, Inc., hereby disclaims all copyright interest in the program `Gnomovision' (which makes passes at compilers) written by James Hacker._ In this case the MPI holds the copyright and publishes the software under the GPL (plus restrictions), up to now. If you want to change the copyright holder you should get the MPI to sign the disclaimer, and then change the notices to "The ESPResSo team". Now for the license change. The usual way of handling license changes is to contact all developers if possible, and let the rest complain if they do not agree; their contributions can be rewritten in this case. But here I don't think it's even necessary, as the spirit of the LICENSE.TXT is quite clear. Let us analyze it point by point. _1. The GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE (GPL) applies with the following additions._ All contributors have already agreed to the GPL, so the only problem is in removing the additions. _2. Use of ESPResSo is properly acknowledged in publications and communications. At present ESPResSo is cited as: ESPResSo, http://www.espresso.mpg.de_ This is a standard attribution clause, but referring to use of the program (not distribution or modification). The GPL explicitly says: _Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted [...]_. It is not even clear that a copyright license can limit usage of the software: once the software has been copied to the target machine the license does not bind the users anymore. So I would say this clause is useless except as a "gentleman's agreement", which can be stated in the README. _3. Users are encouraged to send feedback about bugs, code extensions, script additions and third party usage to: [email protected]_ This is just some information which can also be added to the README. _4. ESPResSo is intended only to be used for academic research ensuring proper knowledge about simulation techniques. It is not suited for commercial or industrial purposes._ As Karl said, if this is meant as a warning then it can be added to the README. Otherwise, if you want to impose additional restrictions then all recipients will be bound by it and by the GPL, which states: _You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein._ So further redistribution would be impossible, which is directly against the GPL. We may thus safely infer that only the warning is desired. _5. ESPResSo is delivered without any warranty, expressed or implied. The authors are not liable for any loss or damage arising from the use of ESPResSo._ Disclaimer of warranty, already in the GPL. _6. Severability Clause: The provisions, sections, subdivisions and articles of this license shall be considered to be severable, so that if any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or any part of this license is declared to be unconstitutional or void, or if for any reason is declared to be invalid or of no effect, or its application to any person or circumstance is altered amended, abrogated, repealed, superseded by state law or held invalid, the remaining sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases or parts thereof shall be in no manner affected thereby but shall remain in full force and effect._ If everything that remains of the license is the GPL then there is no problem with this clause. I would say: remove LICENSE.TXT and relicense under the GPL, and add everything else to the README file (but outside the license itself, i.e. not mandatory). _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?10626> _______________________________________________ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/
