On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 00:42:39 -0400 Ben Westover wrote:
Hello,
Hi!
I was going to package some software that has portions licensed under
the Microsoft Public License. Is it copatible with the DFSG? A quick
search yielded no results.
There seems to be an [old thread] about possible interactions with
MS-PL licensed libraries and LGPL licensed libraries. However, it does
not go into much detail about the MS-PL...
[old thread]: <
https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2010/12/msg00056.html>
Below is the full text of the license.
Thanks,
You are welcome.
What follows is my quick analysis of the license text.
Please note that I am a DM, but I only speak for myself: this is not an official statement from the Debian Project, just my own personal
opinion.
--
[...]
This license governs use of the accompanying software. If you use the software, you accept this license. If you do not accept the license, do
not use the software.
This may be a minor flaw of this license: it wants to govern use, while
Free Software license should not restrict use (usually, only copy, modification, redistribution, and stuff like that, are possibly
restricted).
However, it seems that use is not much restricted by the license text
(see below), so this flaw could perhaps be considered negligible...
1. Definitions
[...]
Nothing special or surprising here, it seems.
2. Grant of Rights
(A) Copyright Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants
you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license to
reproduce its contribution, prepare derivative works of its
contribution, and distribute its contribution or any derivative works
that you create.
This seems to allow anyone to copy, modify, and/or redistribute the
work. It looks OK.
(B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the
license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants
you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in the software or derivative
works of the contribution in the software.
This grants a patent license as well.
It seems to be a good thing to have.
3. Conditions and Limitations
(A) No Trademark License- This license does not grant you rights to use
any contributors' name, logo, or trademarks.
This is implicitly true for many Free Software licenses.
Hence, nothing to worry about, I would say.
...unless the work under consideration is associated with trademarks
governed by some overly aggressive trademark policies.
(B) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents
that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from
such contributor to the software ends automatically.
This clause restricts your possibility to sue for patent infringement:
if you do so for patents related to the work, you lose the patent grant
from the sued contributor over the work itself.
This kind of clauses were discussed a long ago on debian-legal: if I
recall correctly, this, rather limited, variant was considered to be
acceptable by many (if not all) debian-legal regulars at the time.
(C) If you distribute any portion of the software, you must retain all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices that are present
in the software.
Nothing unusual.
(D) If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form,
you may do so only under this license by including a complete copy of
this license with your distribution. If you distribute any portion of
the software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this license.
Rather permissive, I would say.
(E) The software is licensed "as-is." You bear the risk of using it. The contributors give no express warranties, guarantees or conditions. You
may have additional consumer rights under your local laws which this
license cannot change. To the extent permitted under your local laws,
the contributors exclude the implied warranties of merchantability,
fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement.
Typical warranty disclaimer (even though worded in rather unusual way).
I think it's fine.
All in all, it seems to me that the license text should be considered acceptable.
I think that software solely licensed under these terms (barring other
issues) could be considered to comply with the DFSG.
Bye!
--
http://www.inventati.org/frx/
There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! ..................................................... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEygERR5zS79/7gjklPhwn4R9pv/4FAmMJRiwACgkQPhwn4R9p v/6dDA//ReOu+yaWsZKoNdOtUq788Vh/drZpWsVmthcvYnVmp6b0++6WH+tzPBrw H+ICdUm+aeTB0dVWFLxlKkdfpgZ8fvJzetVdAFPRFpfuPsNopeJedDcwwibtqVsa IwJ76YVDiQqERraxTg0EuF2PoBT7Y4/r7kLbi9Y0eOGsIeCJsAgNYZ8ji9X4Nshs +rWgCcShOL0y8avEjqne1XrRIAy+KQsJYYJz/ykAolIZn9MMNt3C14YOWlLEGNNs CTBVE/NeUhvwClML4TEny6UxrtMMmEdGgxv1QkyXRT5wgHRRpAdU2uldWNQgXNXk h4QdCzG+RXWxjMrDG6NzroMMVJe1DB3m7WdV22Lxn74KRQ305NasGqQLqjUA30KW RBEhMYAAeo0xZwaNpH5VQoOQduuGmroJteBRrDVULVEK9xrUpl5ntqch/6pwgmot G7eAlTHvnRzLH9DZpEx/JcCrWW6oAt5DacGKijIuSnAWXemJJ1+Mu0J29ggbpz1f t6knzXBvBpm+WumjIPl6LVs8dtTu2RtobvwJFjiBy2Q406ExsHCrDgDUdyi3MOkw AHCmBzagzCpen7TyptXrhQdds5biLdN3DfL8Fw+uJZPFU2mGMX2weqPwPNAWFiID NL86mzTYC96oty6jb/a3jFrKKpZ5tYcI