(IAARHL, IANASL[1], TINLA) On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 11:56:59 +1000 Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The GPLv3 allows certain options to be taken, so that it becomes > compatible with a number of other licences, such as BSD varients. > > Samba4 includes a number of pieces of such code in the form of Heimdal > (a Kerberos implementation we currently have bundled), do I have to do > make some special note (other than complying with the restrictions, by > including copyright notices in the docs)? No, if you are just incorporating third-party code under pre-existing GPL-compatible licenses in customary fashion, you don't have to do anything. The practice under GPLv3 is exactly the same as the practice under GPLv2. E.g., a GPLv2/v3-licensed work can contain some parts under compatible BSD-variant licenses, but no special notice beyond preservation of the BSD-like license notice is necessary. The legitimacy of compatibility [if indeed it is legitimate in any given case] is understood. Where you would need to do something extra is if you are applying GPLv3 to your own code (as opposed to third-party code under a formal non-GPL but GPL-compatible license) along with one of the tolerated additional conditions. In that case, reference to the particular category in GPLv3 section 7 authorizing the additional term would be good practice. Same goes for permissive exceptions; the FSF now has some examples of how those should be applied in GPLv3-licensed code, which involve making reference to section 7. - RF [1]Samba is a former client. _______________________________________________ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
