[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-kimageshop
Subject:    Re: [Openexr-devel] Fwd: Re: [gnu.org #348899] GPL compatibility
From:       Florian Kainz <kainz () ilm ! com>
Date:       2007-12-07 1:33:30
Message-ID: 4758A2EA.3050104 () ilm ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Cyrille,

did you forward the entire answer you got from the FSF?
In your mail I did not see any statement to the effect that
linking your project with CTL is prohibited by the GPL, much
less an explanation why this would be the case.

By the way, you may want to consider changing the licensing
of your own project.

Florian


Cyrille Berger wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> After our discution yesterday on openexr-devel@nongnu.org, I have asked the 
> opinion of licensing@fsf.org, and here is the two answers I got. So the third 
> clause (patent and trademark) is not a problem with GPL. But they confirm 
> that the jurisdiction clause is not compatible with GPL (or the other way 
> arround ;) ).
> 
> And indeed that concern only the ctl library and not openexr which use a more 
> classical BSD licence.
> 
> I am going to contact AMPAS about it and will keep you inform.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Subject:
> Re: [gnu.org #348899] GPL compatibility with CTL licence
> From:
> "Brett Smith via RT" <licensing@fsf.org>
> Date:
> Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:11:54 -0500
> To:
> cberger@cberger.net
> 
> To:
> cberger@cberger.net
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 05:03:56PM -0500, Cyrille Berger via RT wrote:
>>But what about the third clause ? I am going to try to see with the authors if 
>>they are willing to change the licence, and I want to be sure that the 
>>jurisdiction clause is the only problem ?
> 
> I have not consulted with a lawyer, and so this is not a final answer, but
> I don't think the third clause is an obstacle to GPL-compatibility.  The
> first part merely states what most people would assume to be true anyway if
> the license said nothing about the subject at all.  The second part,
> restricting your use of related names for publicity purposes, is fairly
> standard and one we've accepted as GPL-compatible before; see, for example,
> the Standard ML of New Jersey license.
> 
>>Is it ok if I forward your answer to some mailing list (mainly 
>>openexr-devel@nongnu.org and kimageshop@kde.org) where those issues have been 
>>discussed in the past and where other people might look having the same 
>>question ?
> 
> Feel free to share my e-mails verbatim with those lists.  Please make sure
> you include the quoted parts as well as my original text; they help
> establish important context and avoid misunderstandings.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openexr-devel mailing list
> Openexr-devel@nongnu.org
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel

_______________________________________________
kimageshop mailing list
kimageshop@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]