On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 04:45:06PM -0400, Evan Huus wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Can we please discuss the removal of files before doing so?
>
> I did [1], it just took me a few weeks to get around to removing it
> since nobody objected at the time.
>
> [1] https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev/201309/msg00182.html
Oops, sorry.
> > IIRC, while the 4 clause BSD license is incompatible with the
> > GPL, the regents granted a general "amnesty" so code copyrighted
> > by them gets treated like a 3 clause BSD license.
>
> There's also the issue of the Qualcomm claim (which is rather
> ambiguous). If this is true however, 4-clause BSD should be added to
> our "acceptable licenses" list.
No, unfortunately it can't be added: It can only be added if the only
copyright for the file is
Copyright (c) 1989 Regents of the University of California.
As you mentioned that is not the case here, we either need permission
from
* This file created by Irfan Khan <ikhan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
* Copyright (c) 2001 by QUALCOMM, Incorporated.
or we can't distribute binaries using that file. What we can do though
is provide the source file without compiling it in. So maybe put it into
the wiki so the knowhow isn't lost in case someone wants to recreate it
(or just use it for a locally built copy).
Ciao
Jörg
--
Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
