Bug#964815: marked as done (it looks like dprof2calltree cannot be distributed with a GPL-2 work)
Your message dated Sat, 11 Jul 2020 18:04:12 +0300
with message-id <20200711150412.GA23784@localhost>
and subject line Re: Bug#964815: it looks like dprof2calltree cannot be distributed with a GPL-2 work
has caused the Debian Bug report #964815,
regarding it looks like dprof2calltree cannot be distributed with a GPL-2 work
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
964815: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=964815
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: kcachegrind-converters
Version: 4:17.08.3-2
Severity: serious
Tags: upstream
Forwarded: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=424078
While preparing to import the new upstream release (https://salsa.debian.org/qt-kde-team/kde/kcachegrind/-/merge_requests/3) I did a copyright review, and during that review I discovered converters/dprof2calltree © 2004 OmniTI Computer Consulting with a problematic advertising clause. Here is a copy of what I filed upstream:
converters/dprof2calltree is © 2004 OmniTI Computer Consulting
Unfortunately its BSD-4-like (with problematic advertising clause) has the following issue:
* All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement: This product includes software developed by OmniTI Computer Consulting.
* Neither name of the company nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
I'm not 100% certain that bundling dprof2calltree with kcachegrind constitutes a "product[s] derived from this software", because I'm also of the opinion that bundling != derivation, but it seems like a lawyer might argue the it does. So kcachegrind and any distributions' package would also need written persmission from OmniTI Computer Consulting.
Metadata, such as a package description (deb, rpm, etc.) or possibly even converters/README can be argued to be advertising materials. If the package description appears in an "App store" like Discover then I think it would be considered advertising.
Thus, mentioning features provided by dprof2calltree in any user-facing way appears to require written permission from OmniTI Computer Consulting.
Given how this requirements is more restrictive than the GPL-2, it looks like dprof2calltree cannot be distributed with a GPL-2 work.
Disclaimer, this is not legal advice, but legal advice should be sought if kcachegrind is to continue to distribute dprof2calltree.
Thanks,
Nicholas
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 03:36:04PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 18:33:32 -0400 Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>...
> Well, as far as I can say, the 4-clause BSD license is considered
> acceptable for Debian main.
> It is also [considered] a free software license by the FSF, although it
> is considered GPL-incompatible, ugly and strongly recommended against
> (for people who are choosing a license to release new software under).
>...
> It would therefore be safer to not include 4-clause BSD licensed
> material in a package where other parts (or libraries) are under the
> GNU GPL.
The main point here is that there is no legal problem that needs fixing,
so let's not use words like "safer" that would imply otherwise.
I am not disputing the "ugly and strongly recommended against".
>...
> • try and get in touch with OmniTI Computer Consulting and persuade
> them to re-license the dprof2calltree converter under the terms of
> the 3-clause BSD license (which does not include the deprecated OAC
> and is indeed GPL-compatible), but persuade them on the ground of
> GPL-incompatibility, deprecation, and practical issues of the OAC
> (not on the ground of a DFSG-freeness issue, since there is no such
> issue!)
OmniTI was bought by credativ, if anyone thinks it is worth the effort
they do employ some DDs.
> • try and find a GPL-compatible replacement for dprof2calltree
>...
These are 2 scripts with a combined 350 LOC, if anyone really cares
it is likely fastest to rewrite from scratch.
cu
Adrian
--- End Message ---
Reply to: