Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Spin commercial license

2009-12-11 Thread Jerry James
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Tom spot Callaway
tcall...@redhat.com wrote:
 Nope. Non-free.

 ~spot

Dang.  I hoped that having a license at all would be an improvement
over the days when there was no visible license for that tool...

Thank you for checking.
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/

___
Fedora-legal-list mailing list
Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list


[Fedora-legal-list] Spin commercial license

2009-12-08 Thread Jerry James
Is this license acceptable for Fedora (assuming a copy is provided
with the package, as required by the license)?

http://www.spinroot.com/spin/spin_license.html

Thank you,
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/

___
Fedora-legal-list mailing list
Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list


Re: [Fedora-legal-list] NIST license

2009-04-15 Thread Jerry James
Here is the NIST license for another piece of their software, SCTK.
It says that the software is public domain, but also includes an
explicit disclaimer.  Is that still Public Domain for spec file
purposes?


This software was developed at the National Institute of Standards and
Technology by employees of the Federal Government in the course of their
official duties.  Pursuant to title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code
this software is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public
domain. SCTK is an experimental system.  NIST assumes no responsibility
whatsoever for its use by other parties, and makes no guarantees, expressed or
implied, about its quality, reliability, or any other characteristic. We would
appreciate acknowledgement if the software is used.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED AS IS.  With regard to this software, NIST MAKES NO
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTY AS TO ANY MATTER WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING
MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.



Incidentally, there's yet another of those broken AS IS clauses here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/MIT#Old_Style_with_legal_disclaimer_3

Regards,
-- 
Jerry James
http://loganjerry.googlepages.com/

___
Fedora-legal-list mailing list
Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list


Re: [Fedora-legal-list] NIST license

2009-04-13 Thread Jerry James
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Tom spot Callaway
tcall...@redhat.com wrote:
 NIST's statement above seems to only apply to their World Wide Web
 pages. They're not declaring it public domain either, they're granting
 explicit rights to distribute and copy. It is notably more complicated
 to put something in the Public Domain in the US, so it safe to assume
 that no code that you might come across is in the Public Domain. When in
 doubt, ask.
 (There are some notable cases where we accept that code is in the Public
 Domain, such as sqlite and SELinux, but they're corner cases.)

 Now, if they say that that license applies to all code offered on
 their website that they are the copyright holder, it would still not be
 acceptable in Fedora, because they did not give us the right to modify
 code. (They didn't disclaim warranty either, but that's just stupidity
 on their part.) I strongly suspect that this license does not apply to
 their copyrighted code, due to the way it is worded.

Thanks, Tom.  I'll assume that the first person I reached was clueless
and try asking the question again.

Or I may not bother.  I've discovered that one of the outside files
they filched comes from shorten, an audio processing program with a
no commercial use license.  There are truly open source programs
that do the same thing, so this is not necessarily fatal, but I'm not
sure I've got the time to devote to recoding NIST's software.

 P.S. Jerry, I almost didn't see your post because it got caught in the
 mailman spam trap. This mailing list is reasonably low-traffic, perhaps
 you should subscribe? :)

Yeah, probably.  I'm on so many mailing lists already, how much pain
could one more cause me? :-)

Hmmm, why doesn't this list appear on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate ?
-- 
Jerry James
http://loganjerry.googlepages.com/

___
Fedora-legal-list mailing list
Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list


[Fedora-legal-list] NIST license

2009-04-10 Thread Jerry James
Re: the recent speech recognition thread on Fedora-devel, I am looking
at packaging up a few tools from http://www.nist.gov/speech/tools/,
SPHERE in particular.  However, the distribution contains no mention
of a license.  A query about this was answered with a pointer to this
page:

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/disclaim.htm

which says, These World Wide Web pages are provided as a public
service by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
With the exception of material marked as copyrighted, information
presented on these pages is considered public information and may be
distributed or copied. Use of appropriate byline/photo/image credits
is requested.

The SPHERE source distribution contains a directory, src/lib/sp, which
does contain code with copyright and license statements.  However,
this is code that was written outside of NIST and appears to be
released under a variety of open source licenses.  I will do a
thorough audit of that directory before proceeding.  Assuming that
audit turns up no problems, what do you think of NIST's statement
above?  Since the code they wrote contains no copyright statements,
are they declaring it public domain?  I can ask for more information
if necessary, but I'd appreciate a hand with crafting the questions if
so.

I hope this doesn't turn into the conversation I had with a prominent
computer scientist a couple of years ago.  He distributes some
excellent software with no clear license.  We had a conversation that
went something like this.

Me: Under what license are you distributing this software?
Him: Argh!  I hate it when people ask me that!  I'm just doing
research and making the results of my research available to the
public!
Me: Yes, but the public doesn't know what they are allowed to do with
your software.  That's what the license spells out.
Him: They can do whatever they want with it.  That's why I put it on
a web page!
Me: Great, would you mind just writing that in a license file and
including it with the software?
Him: I haven't got time for this nonsense.  If you find the software
useful, then use it.  If not, don't use it!
[Conversation then goes in circles for the next 5 minutes until me gives up.]
--
Jerry James
http://loganjerry.googlepages.com/
http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/

___
Fedora-legal-list mailing list
Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list