[Debian-med-packaging] Bug#807580: More licensing issues (Was: BLAT license)

[Jim Kent]

Sorry not to get back to you sooner.  I'm just getting a lot of
post-vacation mail pile up.

A copyleft license sounds like it would work.  In particular I would be
happy to distribute it under Common Development and Distribution License

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Andreas Tille <andreas at an3as.eu> wrote:

> Hi Jim,
>
> I just want to make sure that your question about license suggestions
> was answered this time and you are not waiting for further input as last
> time.  Please let us know about the status like:  I'm working on
> relicensing with colleagues and officials / I need further input / I do
> not consider any license change.  We just need to adapt our actions
> accordingly.
>
> Kind regards
>
>        Andreas.
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:38:25AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Hi Jim,
> >
> > do you consider Michael's hint helpful.  As you know we are taking
> > licensing issues serious (I'm wondering whether the people you want to
> > protect your code from are doing so as well or whether you are just
> > keeping away from using the code the honest one who care ;-) ).  Please
> > let us know if you want us to remove the affected code from Debian by
> > removing about 10 BioConductor packages.
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> >        Andreas.
> >
> > Mental note to myself:
> >     I somehow could imagine a "Free your code for Christmas" initiative
> >     in general.  May be we should think about this for 2016 at least.
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 09:18:36AM +0000, Michael Crusoe wrote:
> > > If you are looking to ensure that derivative works aren't relicensed,
> and
> > > you want to use an existing license (which I recommend) then you are
> > > looking for a copyleft license.
> > >
> > > I like this interactive guide to software licenses:
> > > http://oss-watch.ac.uk/apps/licdiff/
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015, 10:35 Andreas Tille <andreas at an3as.eu> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Jim,
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 09:03:50AM +0100, Jim Kent wrote:
> > > > > Perhaps I did not phrase it directly enough.  I ended my last
> email with
> > > > > > > > Perhaps in your files is a license that has a word or two on
> this
> > > > > subject
> > > > > > > > already?
> > > > >
> > > > > By this I mean,  do you have a license that mentions something
> about not
> > > > > allowing sublicenses on the license?  Could you send it to me if
> you do?
> > > >
> > > > I'm afraid I'm not sure what you mean by "sublicenses".  Do you think
> > > > that redistribution of possibly changed code is "sublicensing"?
> Please
> > > > check whether the license you have in mind will have any conflict
> with
> > > > the following DFSG guidelines which are widely accepted as open
> source
> > > > definition:
> > > >
> > > >    https://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines
> > > >
> > > > If you see any conflict in any of these items we probably can not
> find
> > > > any license that will fit your needs.  It would help if you would
> > > > exactly specify what you want to approach with the license.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > >
> > > >      Andreas.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > http://fam-tille.de
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Debian-med-packaging mailing list
> > > > Debian-med-packaging at lists.alioth.debian.org
> > > >
> > > >
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-med-packaging
> > > >
> >
> > --
> > http://fam-tille.de
>
> --
> http://fam-tille.de
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-med-packaging/attachments/20151219/81bfc9af/attachment-0002.html>