Mechtilde Stehmann <[email protected]> writes: > Hello Arto, > >>> please list these two files with their license separatly >>> >>> test/ts-preset/fixture/package.json >>> test/ts-preset-streaming/fixture/package.json >>> >>> Thanks >>> > >> This looks like a false positive by the licenserecon tool that was used. >> The mentioned files are fake JSON definitions of typescript packages, >> used as test fixtures. A definition like that contains a "license" field >> that triggers the tool. > > This is also a result of manual check. > >> These aren't real packages, there is no source code. As far as I >> understand these test fixtures have been written by the same author and >> are a part of the this package and if any copyright license applies to >> them (I'm not a lawyer but if I was and you'd pay me a couple of >> thousand dollars I'd tell you that they aren't copyrightable) it's the >> same one that applies to the rest of it (GPLv3+). > > It is the task of the upstream author to define the preferred license.
Very much agreed, and that exactly is why I'm asking these followup questions instead of just making the requested change to the copyright file. The upstream author has defined the preferred license as GPLv3+, even though the file content includes the strings "license" and "ISC", which the tool interprets as having a meaning that it does not have (it is not the license of the file, it is the license of the typescript package being described, which does not exist and isn't meant to exist as the file is a test fixture of an application licensed under the GPL). -- Arto Jantunen
