[Pkg-ace-devel] Bug#697848: Bug#697848: non-free files in main

[Ansgar Burchardt]

Hi,

On 01/15/2013 21:24, Thomas Girard wrote:
>> the following license conditions (from 6.1.2-1's d/copyright) look quite
>> non-free as they restrict how the program may be modified:
> 
> I assume you are referring to DFSG#3 here? Or DFSG#1?

I mean DFSG#3.

>> ----
>>  [...] You
>>  may copy and extend functionality (but may not remove functionality)
>>  of the Interface Definition Language CFE without charge, but you are
>>  not authorized to license or distribute it to anyone else except as
>>  part of a product or program developed by you or with the express
>>  written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun").
>> ----
> 
> My reading of the text above is that it's possible to license or
> distribute IDL CFE to anyone if:
> 
>  - the licensee has express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>    ("Sun"); or
>  - it's part of a product or program developed by the licensee
> 
> While first condition is impossible to meet, the second one looks
> similar (to me) to DFSG#1.
> 
> But maybe the issue here is the /but may not remove functionality/
> sentence?

Yes. I believe that is a non-free restriction: I want to be able to
remove functionality if I don't like it (say it is an antifeature[1]).

  [1] <http://www.fsf.org/bulletin/2007/fall/antifeatures/>

>> ----
>>  You may copy, modify, distribute, or sublicense the LICENSED PRODUCT
>>  without charge as part of a product or software program developed by
>>  you, so long as you preserve the functionality of interoperating with
>>  the Object Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol" version
>>  one.  However, any uses other than the foregoing uses shall require
>>  the express written consent of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>> ----
> 
> Likewise, I don't see what's wrong here, except maybe for /so long as
> you preserve the functionality of interoperating with the Object
> Management Group's "Internet Inter-ORB Protocol"/
> 
> Is this the part that triggered this bug report?

It's the restriction how one may modify it. For example I am not allowed
to implement a modified protocol (or a newer version) if that
means it would no longer be compatible to the version one. Or to use
parts of the code to implement something totally different.

Ansgar