Re: Missing copyright clause of debian directory

I've only looked at this situation for a total of five minutes prior to writing this email, so take this with a grain of salt. But to help you make forward progress... Upstream seems to use GPL-3+ (not GPL-3). For example:

Re: "freenginx" open source package and "nginx" from F5 open source, potential conflict?

First off, I don't know anyone involved in this. On 2024-02-26 11:49, Thomas Ward wrote: Back on February 14^th , an email went to the standard NGINX mailing list that NGINX (F5) open source development changed a lot of policies and interfered with security policy use cases I don't know

Re: FreeSWITCH license analysis

I dug into this a bit. We use FreeSWITCH at my day job, so I'm certainly interested in this sort of thing. I'm not a lawyer either, though. In this particular case, I see @coppice-git's point that these are basically math data tables. Personally, I don't think it's a problem in this

Re: d/copyright entries for licenses and copyright data

I document them the same, except that I also add use the DEP-5 "Comment" field to indicate that it came from "B". -- Richard OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

BSD-3-Clause-Attribution GPL Compatibility

The BSD-3-Clause-Attribution license [1] has a term which reads: Redistributions of any form whatsoever must retain the following acknowledgment: 'This product includes software developed by .' where examples of are: the "Universidad de Palermo, Argentina"

Re: mini-httpd NCSA license

On 2023-07-02 16:43, Alexandru Mihail wrote: mini-httpd contains early portions of code commited by Rob McCool which seem to originate from NCSA httpd. Just htpasswd.c (which is what I get when searching for Rob McCool), or something else? How do we proceed to clarify this situation?

Re: Zend Optimizer License

On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 22:36 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le jeudi 10 juillet 2008 à 15:06 -0500, Richard Laager a écrit : 7. Indemnity. Licensee will, at its own expense, defend any action brought by a third party against Zend to the extent that such action is based on a claim arising

Zend Optimizer License

I'm looking to package the Zend Optimizer software for Debian. It's definitely non-free, but I believe the license allows for redistribution. I'm looking for a sanity check on that point before I go any further and would be grateful for any comments you can provide. Thanks, Richard LICENSE