> On Nov 23, 2015, at 8:50 AM, Fendt, Oliver <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for sharing this. 
> I'am wondering who should use the tool?
> In my opinion it can only be used by the copyright holders of the single 
> files where the standard license header shall be replaced and not by any 
> other person.
> It might be picky and you might say, hey that is something equivalent, but 
> the GPL-2.0 for example says in chapter 1:
> ..."keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence 
> of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this 
> License
> along with the Program."...
> 
> If you as a "non copyright holder" of a OSS package replace the standard 
> GPL-2.0 header by (let's say) "this is licensed under GPL-2.0" In my opinion 
> you have violated the GPL, because of the chapter 1. 
> 
> You can argue "that there is no violation because it is just another notice 
> for the same thing", _but_ at least you have removed the phrase:
> "    This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>    but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>    MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>    GNU General Public License for more details."
> 
> Which is an element for the standard GPL-2.0 header, and this is for sure a 
> GPL violation because of "keep intact all the notices ... to the absence of 
> any warranty". I do not want to violate the GPL, you?
> 
If you are not the copyright holder and do not have the copyright holder’s 
permission, then I would not recommend removing a notice, especially in this 
case (i.e., GPL, has specific notice, has requirement to retain notices, etc.) 
- both from a legal perspective and as good practice. If you are the copyright 
holder or have the copyright holder’s permission, then you may choose to do 
otherwise.

Jilayne  (I am a lawyer, I’m not your lawyer, your lawyer may say something 
different)

_______________________________________________
Spdx-tech mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech

Reply via email to