From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,d0f6c37e3c1b712a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada in Debian: most libraries will switch to the pure GPL in Etch References: <1151405920.523542.137920@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1151422118.772405.307200@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> From: M E Leypold Date: 27 Jun 2006 17:38:28 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG) NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.243.222 X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1151422336 88.72.243.222 (27 Jun 2006 17:32:16 +0200) X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.freenet.de!newsfeed0.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!news.unit0.net!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:5094 Date: 2006-06-27T17:38:28+02:00 List-Id: "Ludovic Brenta" writes: > Dr. Adrian Wrigley wrote : > > On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 03:58:40 -0700, Ludovic Brenta wrote: > > > > > I received detailed answers from AdaCore's Robert Dewar and Arnaud > > > Charlet regarding the licenses of software downloaded from their > > > servers. In summary: > > > > > > - All software downloaded from AdaCore is pure GPL, no matter what the > > > headers say. > > > > > > - This also applies to software downloaded from the CVS server in > > > source-only form. > > > > > > - They refuse to give any assurances regarding copyright ownership, so > > > I feel that I now need to go ask the authors. > > > > > > - They will not sign a license document, even if a lawyer asked them > > > (they are not required to sign anything, of course). > > > > I'm a little confused by all this... > > > > Can you tell us which combination of the following is true, from > > what you understand: > > > > 1) the GMGPL licences issued by AdaCode and others are being revoked? > > Switched to pure GPL, not revoked. The "linking and generic > instantiation" exception is revoked. > > > 2) AdaCore and others say they never granted licences under GMGPL? > > They don't say that, but they refuse to give details on when the switch > took place. I don't know. Ask them. From a theoretical standpoint, I am > indeed quite worried that I have downloaded and redistributed AdaCore's Considering that act-europe.fr carried the GMGPL license notice for GtkAda et al until 2005/2 at least, there is nothing to worry about (except the attitude of ACT). > software, thinking in good faith I had the right to do so when in > fact I didn't, since I didn't have written permission from any of > the copyright holders. Remember, the headers amount to naught from a > legal perspective. They say. > Practically speaking, I don't think AdaCore will sue me, > or anyone else, for that. IANAL. IANAL2. > > > 3) the licences were granted and are still in force? > > I don't know. I asked but they wouldn't go into specifics. Ask them for > yourself, if you're concerned. > > > 4) all licencing terms embedded in the distributions are repudiated? > > They never had any legal force; only a signed statement from the > copyright holder has legal force. They say. > > > 5) the SW is Free (in http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html terms)? > > Yes, since it is under GPL. That much they are willing to say and > certify, but not in writing :( So they will take even that back in 2 years from now? ... Regards -- Markus