Le jeudi 15 février 2007 21:41, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 09:07:25PM -0500, Philippe Cloutier 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. 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.
> > >>
> > >>IANAL, but this seems to prohibit some things allowed by the GPL to the
> > >>U.S. government. If I understand right, the U.S. Department of Defense
> > >> is not allowed to redistribute or copy freely des.tcl, which would
> > >> violate the DFSG.
> > >
> > >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?
>
> Have you read the cited clause of DFARs?
Yes.
> The numbering listed in this
> clause appears to be obsolete, but "Restricted Rights" as specified in the
> current version enumerates an extensive list of things the government is
> allowed to do.
Yes but as I wrote this doesn't seem allow to redistribute or copy freely.
>
> But in any case, the following sentence is what matters:
>
> 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.
>
> IOW, in *spite* of citing this government regulation, permission is granted
> to use and distribute the software *under the normal license*.
This is also what I read. Do you agree that given the content of this
government regulation, the license is/looks conflicting?
>
> Again, this is an effort to keep the government from claiming *more* rights
> over the software than what's permitted by the usual license, not to
> prevent the government from exercising rights that are granted to everyone
> else.
To make it clear, I believed you when you first stated this. But re-reading
the license, it's still not how I interpret what's written.
