Le jeudi 15 février 2007 21:17, Stephen Gran a écrit :
> This one time, at band camp, Philippe Cloutier said:
> > Steve Langasek a écrit :
> > >On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 03:55:53PM -0500, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > >>GOVERNMENT USE: If you are acquiring this software on behalf of the
> > >> U.S. government, the Government shall have only "Restricted Rights" in
> > >> the software and related documentation as defined in the Federal
> > >> Acquisition Regulations (FARs) in Clause 52.227.19 (c) (2). If you
> > >> are acquiring the software on behalf of the Department of Defense, the
> > >> software shall be classified as "Commercial Computer Software" and the
> > >> Government shall have only "Restricted Rights" as defined in Clause
> > >> 252.227-7013 (c) (1) of DFARs.
>
> This part clarifies that that the government has no additional rights
> beyond those of the license.
>
> > >>Notwithstanding the foregoing, the authors grant the U.S.
> > >>Government and others acting in its behalf permission to use and
> > >>distribute the software in accordance with the terms specified in this
> > >>license.
>
> And this grants them standard rights under the GPL.
>
> > >No, this is a statement that the copyright on the work is not *waived*
> > >where
> > >the federal government is concerned. It doesn't contradict the GPL, it
> > >merely clarifies that the government has no implicit, special rights
> > > over the software beyond those specified in the GPL.
> >
> > Hum, this is not what I read. Do you agree that the license basically
> > states that the Department of Defense has only "Restricted Rights" as
> > defined in Clause 252.227-7013 (c) (1) of DFARs on the software?
>
> Does that make it clearer?
No, sorry. I already know that the first part is the restrictive one and the
last part is the permissive one. The problem is that I see them as
conflicting.
