[Openicc] GoSoC 2011: opensource and ICC licenses

[Ann McCarthy]

So the proposed ICC profile license clause of:
"This profile is made available by [profile provider], with permission of
[profile vendor], and may be copied, distributed, embedded, made, used, and
sold without restriction. Altered versions of this profile shall have the
original identification and copyright information removed and shall not be
misrepresented as the original profile."

perhaps could be slightly altered by inserting the word 'internal":
"This profile is made available by [profile provider], with permission of
[profile vendor], and may be copied, distributed, embedded, made, used, and
sold without restriction. Altered versions of this profile shall have the
original internal identification and copyright information removed and shall
not be misrepresented as the original profile."

An ICC profile has numerous internal markers that indicate the maker, etc.,
and these are the fields that should be used to indicate the profile
contents are changed. Perhaps the profile filename is not the absolute
critical piece. Something to consider...

Best regards,
Ann L McCarthy
Imaging Systems R&D
Lexmark International, Inc.



On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:24 PM, James Cloos <cloos at jhcloos.com> wrote:

> >>>>> "er" == edmund ronald <edmundronald at gmail.com> writes:
>
> er> I think there is some part of the conversation which I have missed
> er> here.  Anyone want to forward it, or educate me?  I am not a lawyer
>
> Clauses along the lines of "you can't change it w/o also renaming it"
> were determined to be incompatible with the GPL some time ago.
>
> One of the goals of the GPL is to allow those who receive software to
> fix it and distribute those fixes.  That goal is not compatible with
> "you can't change it w/o also renaming it".
>
> The debian-legal list's archives are probably the best place to read
> about it.  The FSF, I think, also has a relevant, archived list.
>
> That incompatibility was an issue for TeX; DEK's license for TeX,
> metarfont and the CM fonts included such a clause.
>
> IIRC Don agreed to some slight change to get past that issue.  I suspect
> something along the lines of "if you change it w/o renaming it then you
> have to acknowledge that you did so" instead of the original language.
>
> So, to be GPL compatible, you have to allow changes w/o requiring
> renaming, but you can require that any changes be declared.
>
> -JimC
> --
> James Cloos <cloos at jhcloos.com>         OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
> _______________________________________________
> openicc mailing list
> openicc at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openicc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/openicc/attachments/20110506/ddd3a2a7/attachment.htm>