Re: question: SPDX license for "The Linux Foundation"


Philippe Ombredanne
 

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Steve Rae <srae@...> wrote:
Which SPDX license matches this text?
* Copyright (c) 2009, Google Inc.
* All rights reserved.
* Copyright (c) 2009-2014, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
* modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are
met:
* * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
* documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
* * Neither the name of The Linux Foundation nor
* the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote
* products derived from this software without specific prior written
* permission.
* THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS
IS"
* AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
* IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
AND
* NON-INFRINGEMENT ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR
* CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,
* EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
* PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR
PROFITS;
* OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY,
* WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR
* OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF
* ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.>

(from:
https://www.codeaurora.org/cgit/quic/la/kernel/lk/plain/app/aboot/aboot.c?h=master)
It is _almost_ BSD-3-Clause, but not identical...
The only material difference with BSD-3-Clause seems to be in the disclaimer :

[...] FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT ARE DISCLAIMED [...]
where
"AND NON-INFRINGEMENT" is added

I am not sure the SDPX legal team would consider this as a material change.
The irony is of course that this comes from the LF proper.

--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne

+1 650 799 0949 | pombredanne@...
DejaCode : What's in your code?! at http://www.dejacode.com
nexB Inc. at http://www.nexb.com

Join Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org to automatically receive all group messages.