[Pkg-phototools-devel] Bug#553359: Licensing issues

[Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo]

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Andrew Kaminsky
<kaminsky.andrey at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> ahd_interpolate_mod.c
> ahd_partial_interpolate.c
> es_median_filter.c
> median_filter_new.c
> refinement.c
> vcd_interpolate.c
>
> Those are originally imported from VCD demosaicing:
>
> http://sites.google.com/site/demosaicalgorithms/modified-dcraw
>
> So I think I can`t to attach copyright and license notes.
> I`m not lawyer, but i think they are under the same licenses as dcraw.

As they have based their implementation in dcraw and they are
distributing the sources together, they have to abide to the "use GPL
v2 or later" option in dcraw. But, copyright notice is still needed.
Anyway authors should be contacted for clarification.
Of course, as it is not your work, you cannot attach copyright and/or
license notes.

>
> Next:
>
> libraw_internal_funcs_vcd.h - derived work from VCD demosaicing sources.
> Is this correct if I add copyright and license? If yes - GPL or LGPL. Which one?

Then license is the same than  previous one, but you could add you (c)
to it. License should be GPL, given that they are releasing a modified
dcraw, which is under GPL.

>
> libraw_internal_funcs_amaze.h - derived work from GPL`ed code,
> so I think it is GPL or LGPL.

Has to be GPL then. LGPL is more restrictive than GPL, so nothing
derived from a GPL work can be licensed under LGPL. This is because
LGPL allows linking to closed source programs to libraries licensed
under LGPL, and GPL doesn't.

> libraw_internal_funcs_dcb.h - derived work from code covered by BSD license,
> so I think GPL or LGPL is correct (or may be BSD?).
> (original sources from: http://www.linuxphoto.org/html/algorithms.html )

Can be BSD, GPL or LGPL at your wish, but you have to keep original
(c) and conditions for the original work, as BSD license states. I
would recommend you GPL or BSD, not LGPL.

> Is this enough, or I MUST submit patch.

You should submit a patch for your modified work. For the work you
took from VCD demosaicing, I'll try to contact them before making any
assumption. I'll copy you and the list.

>
> And I don`t understand which license is better in this situation.
> GPL or LGPL. May be LGPL, to be compatible with libraw?

You only need to license under LGPL whatever you want to contribute
back to libraw, as they are using a LGPL license. Whatever you write
as GPL can be linked against any LGPL library, but they won't accept
any patch with a GPL license stick to it.

Regards

-- 
José Carlos García Sogo
   jsogo at debian.org