Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: inchi - The IUPAC International Chemical Identifier library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249212 ------- Additional Comments From wtogami@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-07-24 14:23 EST ------- > License: LGPL Not necessary to do this in the -devel package. > If you are going to develop programs which will use this library > you should install inchi-devel. You'll also need to have the > inchi package installed. Is this part necessary? http://www.iupac.org/inchi/license.html Licensing is confusing... - It implies trademark integrity within the context of copyright terms. - It implies a "request" of copyright advertisement clause, but it seems non-binding by this language. Is this the intent? - None of the source files contain proper copyright notices. Recommendation: 1) Upstream should clear up this confusion by creating a clear separation between the copyright and trademark rights. Copyright explicitly LGPL, and have a separate page/file containing the trademark guidelines. http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html As an example, Mozilla uses a trademark guideline to protect the integrity of their mark, without running afoul of the (L)GPL requirement of "no additional restrictions" on the copyright. 2) All source files must contain a proper and explicit copyright notice. To quote LGPL: " You must give prominent notice with each copy of the work that the Library is used in it and that the Library and its use are covered by this License." Under the terms of the LGPL, those copyright statements would of course not be removed by others. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review