Re: [License-discuss] BSD license, source distributions and interpretations of "retain"

2015-01-13 Thread Gervase Markham
On 10/01/15 18:16, Michael Bradley wrote:
> Now suppose Project B’s source code is derived from Project A’s
> source code, but the maintainer of Project B wishes to use a
> different license.

What do you mean by "use"? Do you mean "use a different license for
project B when distributed as a whole", or do you mean "actively prevent
bits of project A which are in, and have been modified by, project B
from being used under the license of project A (e.g. by reincorporation
into the upstream)"?

> In an effort to avoid confusion, Project B has
> that different license text at the head of each of its source code
> files, while Project A's original license text has been moved off to
> a file bundled in Project B's source distributions, e.g.
> “licenses/ORIGINAL-PROJECTA-LICENSE.txt”.
> 
> Would that be in compliance with the “retain” language in clause #1
> of the 3-Clause BSD license?

Clause 1 and Clause 2 are differently worded; clause 2 says "in the
documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution",
and clause 1 does not. That suggests to me that clause 1 therefore is
_not_ satisfied with "in the documentation and/or other materials
provided with the distribution", if that's not the case already for the
source in question, but needs to be left on each file.

> Is there any case law to that effect or
> to the contrary? References to legal write-ups on this question (or
> similar) would be appreciated.

I can't help you with actual legal advice, I'm afraid.

Gerv
___
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@opensource.org
http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss


Re: [License-discuss] BSD license, source distributions and interpretations of "retain"

2015-01-10 Thread David Woolley

On 10/01/15 18:16, Michael Bradley wrote:

Now suppose Project B’s source code is derived from Project A’s source code, 
but the maintainer of Project B wishes to use a different license. In an effort 
to avoid confusion, Project B has that different license text at the head of 
each of its source code files, while Project A's original license text has been 
moved off to a file bundled in Project B's source distributions, e.g. 
“licenses/ORIGINAL-PROJECTA-LICENSE.txt”.

Would that be in compliance with the “retain” language in clause #1 of the 
3-Clause BSD license? Is there any case law to that effect or to the contrary? 
References to legal write-ups on this question (or similar) would be 
appreciated.


This is not legal advice, but in my opinion the least B could get away 
with is the inclusion of a reference to the file in the source files 
derived from A, and possibly also a statement that the file cannot be 
redistributed without the licences file.


Especially given the shortness of the BSD licence, I would think the 
community expectation would be that the source file contained the text 
of both licences, indicating who owned the copyrights under each.  The 
paragon would be to also identify in the code which bits came under 
which copyright.


If B had not created any new copyright in the file, e.g. they did no 
more than change some customisation parameter, I would say the file 
should only contain A's copyright notice, and licence terms.


___
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@opensource.org
http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss


Re: [License-discuss] BSD license, source distributions and interpretations of "retain"

2015-01-10 Thread Francois Marier
On 2015-01-10 at 12:16:04, Michael Bradley wrote:
> Would that be in compliance with the “retain” language in clause #1 of the
> 3-Clause BSD license? Is there any case law to that effect or to the
> contrary? References to legal write-ups on this question (or similar)
> would be appreciated.

This may be useful:

  https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html

Francois

-- 
Francois Marier   identi.ca/fmarier
http://fmarier.org  twitter.com/fmarier
___
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@opensource.org
http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss


[License-discuss] BSD license, source distributions and interpretations of "retain"

2015-01-10 Thread Michael Bradley
Suppose Project A is licensed under 3-Clause BSD, and includes that license 
text at the head of each of its source code files.

Now suppose Project B’s source code is derived from Project A’s source code, 
but the maintainer of Project B wishes to use a different license. In an effort 
to avoid confusion, Project B has that different license text at the head of 
each of its source code files, while Project A's original license text has been 
moved off to a file bundled in Project B's source distributions, e.g. 
“licenses/ORIGINAL-PROJECTA-LICENSE.txt”.

Would that be in compliance with the “retain” language in clause #1 of the 
3-Clause BSD license? Is there any case law to that effect or to the contrary? 
References to legal write-ups on this question (or similar) would be 
appreciated.

Best regards,

--
Michael Bradley, Jr.
@michaelsbradley

___
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@opensource.org
http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss