Menu
▾
▴
Re: [kphone-devel] Re: kphone project future (License issues)
|
From: Jan J. <ja...@ip...> - 2005-10-26 08:55:52
|
My two cents: My understanding of the licensing terms is that the authors wanted to give the code away freely and the restriction about modification should ensure interoperability with other implementations. I would just mention in the documentation that the application contains iLBC code which has GPL-incompatible license. Jan. On 25-10-2005 21:51, Klaus Fleischmann wrote: > What will this mean for the kphone? I think at least a notice in the > README and possibly a notice (with licence text ?) in the ilbc subdir. > > Is there a lawyer who knows more? > > Klaus > > > Jan Janak wrote: > >I checked with Alan Duric, one of the authors. The license that applies > >to the code is the this: > > > >http://www.ilbcfreeware.org/documentation/gips_iLBClicense.pdf > > > >And (I am not a laywer) it really does not seem to be GPL compatitle. > >One of the problems with the license is that it demands that > >implementations based on iLBC code stay compatible with the > >implementation in the RFC. That means, for example, derived code must not > >change the format of the bitstream when used in commercial deployments. > > > >GPL imposes no such restriction. Any modifications to the source code > >are allowed if the author makes the source code available. Thus the iLBC > >license is more restrictive than GPL. > > > > Jan. > > > >On 12-10-2005 07:23, Shawn Sulma wrote: > > > >>On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 09:42:14AM +0300, Juha Heinanen wrote: > >>| i don't know about that. the only copyright that rfc3951 containing > >>| iLBC source code has reads: Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). > >>| i cannot understand, how there could be any kind of Global IP Sound > >>| copyright on the code. > >> > >> > >>I am not a lawyer. I don't pretend to be one. However, this is my take > >>from > >>delving a bit into the copyright mechanism of IETF. First, in the the RFC > >>itself... > >> > >> This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions > >> contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors > >> retain all their rights. > >> > >>http://rfc.net/bcp78.html is quite a lengthy document, but is definitely > >>worth a read. The only rights that ISC appears to have in the IETF/RFC > >>process are > >> > >> > >>7.1. Rights Granted in IETF Contributions > >> > >> The IETF/ISOC must obtain the right to publish an IETF Contribution > >> as an RFC or an Internet-Draft from the Contributors. > >> > >> A primary objective of this policy is to obtain from the document > >> authors only the non-exclusive rights that are needed to develop and > >> publish IETF Documents and to use the IETF Contributions in the IETF > >> Standards Process while leaving all other rights with the authors. > >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >> > >> The non-exclusive rights that the IETF needs are: > >> > >> a. the right to publish the document > >> b. the right to let the document be freely reproduced in the formats > >> that the IETF publishes it in > >> c. the right to let third parties translate it into languages other > >> than English > >> d. except where explicitly excluded (see Section 5.2), the right to > >> make derivative works within the IETF process. > >> e. the right to let third parties extract some logical parts, for > >> example MIB modules > >> > >> The authors retain all other rights, but cannot withdraw the above > >> rights from the IETF/ISOC. > >> > >> > >>Again, I'm not a lawyer, but there's an entire section on what (d) means, > >>which is basically "allowing the IETF to do its job and generate RFCs > >>which > >>may be derivative works of the submitted material". It doesn't cover > >>external implementations using submitted material. > >> > >>Looking further at the submissions from Global IP Sound on the matter... > >> > >>http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/global-ip-ipr-draft-ietf-avt-ilbc-codec.txt > >>http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/GLOBAL-IP-ANDERSON.txt > >> > >>"... it intends to provide, upon written request from a party implementing > >>the IETF standard technology, ..." > >> > >>this explicit licensing requirement is (AFAIK) not compatible with the > >>GPL. > >>And, from all I can tell, the Global IP Sound public license is the > >>license > >>they intend to provide. I linked to that discussion up-thread -- it > >>doesn't > >>seem GPL-compatible either. > >> > >>The ISC copyright statement is not a license to use the code in a GPL > >>implementation. It covers the RFC document and IETF process, but it is > >>constructed in a way so that the copyrights and whatever other IP > >>protections remain in place for the contributors. > >> > >>Maybe I have it all wrong. But I'd like to make sure that no one's > >>blindsided by the possibility. If I am wrong, I'd like to be shown how > >>-- I > >>don't mind learning. :) > >> > >> Shawn > >> > >> > >>------------------------------------------------------- > >>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: > >>Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, > >>and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl > >>_______________________________________________ > >>kphone-devel mailing list > >>kph...@li... > >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kphone-devel > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- > >This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. > >Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course > >Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 > >Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information > >_______________________________________________ > >kphone-devel mailing list > >kph...@li... > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kphone-devel > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. > Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course > Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 > Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information > _______________________________________________ > kphone-devel mailing list > kph...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kphone-devel |