On 28/02/15 02:31, Riley Baird wrote:
Hi -legal!
I was reviewing a package "classified-ads" for Debian, and I noticed a
potential problem in the process. Namely, the author of the program has decided to use
GPL3 with the OpenSSL exception. However, they have taken some files from Nokia which are
dual licensed under either LGPL2.1 or GPL3. I think that since Nokia did not make the
OpenSSL exception, Debian cannot legally distribute the result. However, I assume that it
would be okay if the maintainer decided to change their license to LGPL2.1. Can someone
confirm whether all of this is correct?
The project is here: https://github.com/operatornormal/classified_ads/
and the Nokia-licensed files are here:
https://github.com/operatornormal/classified_ads/tree/master/textedit
Yours thankfully,
Riley Baird
Or they could keep the files from Nokia under LGPL2.1, and use
GPL3+openssl exception for the rest of the files. Given that they have
proper headers, I don't see a problem with that, although I would
mention that in the readme.
PS: I don't see the OpenSSL exception anywhere there.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54f1e526.3060...@gmail.com
