Henry Spencer's license
by Petr Šabata
Dear legal,
While checking the contents of our `perl' package, I noticed the following:
(...)
/* NOTE: this is derived from Henry Spencer's regexp code, and should not
* confused with the original package (see point 3 below). Thanks, Henry!
*/
/* Additional note: this code is very heavily munged from Henry's version
* in places. In some spots I've traded clarity for efficiency, so don't
* blame Henry for some of the lack of readability.
*/
/* The names of the functions have been changed from regcomp and
* regexec to pregcomp and pregexec in order to avoid conflicts
* with the POSIX routines of the same names.
*/
(...)
* pregcomp and pregexec -- regsub and regerror are not used in perl
*
* Copyright (c) 1986 by University of Toronto.
* Written by Henry Spencer. Not derived from licensed software.
*
* Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any
* purpose on any computer system, and to redistribute it freely,
* subject to the following restrictions:
*
* 1. The author is not responsible for the consequences of use of
* this software, no matter how awful, even if they arise
* from defects in it.
*
* 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either
* by explicit claim or by omission.
*
* 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not
* be misrepresented as being the original software.
*
**** Alterations to Henry's code are...
****
**** Copyright (C) 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,
**** 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
**** by Larry Wall and others
****
**** You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public
**** License or the Artistic License, as specified in the README file.
(...)
You can see the whole file here:
https://metacpan.org/source/SHAY/perl-5.20.1/regexec.c
I looked but couldn't find any common name for this license
of Henry's. Is it on our list? Is it free? What name should
I use in the License tag?
Thank you,
Petr
9 months
Steinberg VST3 SDK
by Benjamin Beasley
The Steinberg VST3 SDK is dual-licensed under a proprietary license or GPLv3, at the user’s choice (https://developer.steinberg.help/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=9797944). So far, so good. There are some files in the tarball that are not dual-licensed (https://developer.steinberg.help/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=9797948), and these would need to be removed to create a redistributable version of the source archive—again, a common and well-documented situation.
However, there is another wrinkle. Steinberg imposes a long list of trademark-related “usage guidelines” (https://developer.steinberg.help/display/VST/Steinberg+VST+usage+guidelines) on all uses, including those under the GPLv3 license option.
I fear these additional terms may make the VST3 SDK unsuitable for packaging in Fedora. If so, the subset of the VST3 SDK bundled in the giada package (which I recently started maintaining) may need to be removed as well. However, I would appreciate input from this list before proceeding in either direction—either removing the bundled SDK (hopefully doing so in %prep would be sufficient) and disabling the associated optional functionality in Giada, or attempting to unbundle the SDK as a separate Fedora package.
Regards,
Ben Beasley
2 years, 9 months
