Hi,
Could you please let me know if the license (Section 1.4) mentioned in the specification document, "C Library ABI for ARM Architecture" [1] an acceptable one for Fedora?
Thanks!
SK
[1] http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.ihi0039b/IHI0039B_clibabi.p...
"SK" == Shakthi Kannan shakthimaan@gmail.com writes:
SK> Hi, Could you please let me know if the license (Section 1.4) SK> mentioned in the specification document, "C Library ABI for ARM SK> Architecture" [1] an acceptable one for Fedora?
A couple of points; I'm not a lawyer.
It does not seem to permit modification. I suppose that's not really a problem for a document (as opposed to code) under Fedora's rules for content.
It restricts the use and copying of the document to "the purpose of developing, having developed, manufacturing, having manufactured, offering to sell, selling, supplying or otherwise distributing products which comply with the Specification." I wonder if I violated the license by looking at the document, since I have no intention of doing any of those things.
- J<
On 01/13/2011 04:41 AM, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
Hi,
Could you please let me know if the license (Section 1.4) mentioned in the specification document, "C Library ABI for ARM Architecture" [1] an acceptable one for Fedora?
This license isn't free, which normally would not be an issue with documentation, as we treat documentation as content (and not code) in Fedora, but there is no permission to distribute documentation with that license, so any documentation under that license would not be permissibility in Fedora (because it fails the content requirement of unrestricted redistributability).
I don't think redistributability is actually a word, but hopefully you get my meaning. :)
~tom
== Fedora Project
Hi,
--- On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 1:18 AM, Tom Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com wrote: | This license isn't free, which normally would not be an issue with | documentation, as we treat documentation as content (and not code) in | Fedora, but there is no permission to distribute documentation with that | license, so any documentation under that license would not be | permissibility in Fedora (because it fails the content requirement of | unrestricted redistributability). --
What about code that complies with the specification? Is it permissible to distribute the same within the Fedora distribution?
Thanks for your feedback,
SK
On 01/13/2011 09:42 PM, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
What about code that complies with the specification? Is it permissible to distribute the same within the Fedora distribution?
The license says:
Notwithstanding the foregoing, “Specification” shall not include (i) the implementation of other published specifications referenced in this Specification;
And since all of the license terms apply to the "Specification", any code written in compliance with this specification is not affected by this license.
Or, to put it simply, this license only applies to the Specification, so even though it is non-free, it has no effect on code. Code will be under independent licensing, which will have to be judged independently.
~tom
== Fedora Project
-
Jason L Tibbitts III -
Shakthi Kannan -
Tom Callaway