Re: The Nutch Software License
On Sun, Jan 30, 2005 at 09:49:09PM +0100, Luca Brivio wrote: Is this license DFSG-free? I ask you that because I sent a RFP for nutch... http://www.nutch.org/LICENSE.txt For the archive record (please always include license texts, not just a link): --- /* * The Nutch Software License, Version 1.0 * * Copyright (c) 2003 The Nutch Organization. All rights reserved. * * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: * * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright *notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. * * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright *notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in *the documentation and/or other materials provided with the *distribution. * * 3. The end-user documentation included with the redistribution, *if any, must include the following acknowledgment: * This product includes software developed by the *Nutch Organization (http://www.nutch.org/). *Alternately, this acknowledgment may appear in the software itself, *if and wherever such third-party acknowledgments normally appear. * * 4. The names Nutch and Nutch Organization must *not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this *software without prior written permission. For written *permission, please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * 5. Products derived from this software may not be called Nutch, *nor may Nutch appear in their name, without prior written *permission of the Nutch Organization. * * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, * INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND * FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE * NUTCH ORGANIZATION OR ITS CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, * INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT * LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, * OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF * LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING * NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, * EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. * * * This software consists of voluntary contributions made by many individuals * on behalf of the Nutch Organization. For more information on the Nutch * Organization, please see http://www.nutch.org/. * * This product includes software developed by the Apache Software Foundation * (http://www.apache.org). */ --- As someone said, this is the old Apache license. XXX may not appear in the name of derivative works is ugly and over-reaching; I think it should be considered non-free (it clearly exceeds DFSG#4), but I don't feel strongly enough to make a fuss about it. I really wish people would stop using this license; it's one thing Apache has given free software that it really was better without ... -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Nutch Software License
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 12:45:44 -0500 Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Jan 30, 2005 at 09:49:09PM +0100, Luca Brivio wrote: Is this license DFSG-free? I ask you that because I sent a RFP for nutch... http://www.nutch.org/LICENSE.txt For the archive record (please always include license texts, not just a link): Sorry, it was the first time that I posted on debian-legal... I was a bit confused ;-) As someone said, this is the old Apache license. XXX may not appear in the name of derivative works is ugly and over-reaching; I think it should be considered non-free (it clearly exceeds DFSG#4), but I don't feel strongly enough to make a fuss about it. I really wish people would stop using this license; it's one thing Apache has given free software that it really was better without ... I think they used that license for that something of their source derives from Apache software. There was an actual difference if they did adopt the new 'Apache License' (Version 2.0, January 2004)? -- Luca Brivio Web:http://icebrook.altervista.org Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homo sum: humani nil a me alienum puto (P. Terentius Afer) pgpz6PF6irW2h.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: The Nutch Software License
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 07:22:09PM +0100, Luca Brivio wrote: As someone said, this is the old Apache license. XXX may not appear in the name of derivative works is ugly and over-reaching; I think it should be considered non-free (it clearly exceeds DFSG#4), but I don't feel strongly enough to make a fuss about it. I really wish people would stop using this license; it's one thing Apache has given free software that it really was better without ... I think they used that license for that something of their source derives from Apache software. There was an actual difference if they did adopt the new 'Apache License' (Version 2.0, January 2004)? Sorry if I was unclear. The Apache 1.1 license (which this is based on) is considered free--it can go in main. It would be nice if propagation of this license could be avoided by switching to a better one--it's not the best license, with the problems I and Matthew mentioned--but there's currently no requirement to do so to go in Debian. -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Nutch Software License
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 13:28:32 -0500 Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 07:22:09PM +0100, Luca Brivio wrote: As someone said, this is the old Apache license. XXX may not appear in the name of derivative works is ugly and over-reaching; I think it should be considered non-free (it clearly exceeds DFSG#4), but I don't feel strongly enough to make a fuss about it. I really wish people would stop using this license; it's one thing Apache has given free software that it really was better without ... I think they used that license for that something of their source derives from Apache software. There was an actual difference if they did adopt the new 'Apache License' (Version 2.0, January 2004)? Sorry if I was unclear. The Apache 1.1 license (which this is based on) is considered free--it can go in main. It would be nice if propagation of this license could be avoided by switching to a better one--it's not the best license, with the problems I and Matthew mentioned--but there's currently no requirement to do so to go in Debian. You were not unclear. The current license is free, but what would you suggest them? -- Luca Brivio Web:http://icebrook.altervista.org Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homo sum: humani nil a me alienum puto (P. Terentius Afer) pgp6jiGjSbAAw.pgp Description: PGP signature
The Nutch Software License
Is this license DFSG-free? I ask you that because I sent a RFP for nutch... http://www.nutch.org/LICENSE.txt -- Luca Brivio Web:http://icebrook.altervista.org Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homo sum: humani nil a me alienum puto (P. Terentius Afer) pgpJm4l3Brlx5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: The Nutch Software License
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 21:11:16 + Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Luca Brivio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --Signature_Sun__30_Jan_2005_21_49_09_+0100_Dy=EZMml=y897PzA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Is this license DFSG-free? I ask you that because I sent a RFP for nutch... http://www.nutch.org/LICENSE.txt Probably. It's got an irritating advertising clause, and it requires name changes in an awkward way. It's a nasty license that shouldn't be encouraged, but it's just about the right side of free. I found it's the same as the old Apache license (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-1.1)... -- Luca Brivio Web:http://icebrook.altervista.org Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homo sum: humani nil a me alienum puto (P. Terentius Afer) pgp9xpRC99mJX.pgp Description: PGP signature
