[ntp:questions] NTP License Check (Was: Re: NTP vs RADclock?)

unruh unruh at invalid.ca
Thu Jun 7 15:49:55 UTC 2012

On 2012-06-07, Dave Hart <hart at ntp.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Steve Kostecke <kostecke at ntp.org> wrote:
>> On 2012-06-07, Dave Hart <hart at ntp.org> wrote:
>>> I am aware of no part of the ntpd tarballs that is solely licensed
>>> under GPL. ?libopts is dual-licensed BSD or GPL at user's choice. ?The
>>> rest of the package is BSD-style, as seen on the pages above. ?If you
>>> are aware of any GPL-only code we're distributing, please speak up so
>>> that we can correct the mistake.
>> List of files containing a GPL License:
> Thanks, Steve.  The tool misses a number of exceptions in libopts and
> Bison output (implying they're GPL-only), but it also found libopts
> files licensed under GPL with no obvious exception, though I hope they
> are oversights that can be corrected easily.

I am not at all sure that you can assert copyright on a generated file
(rather than on the originals from which they are generated) since there
is absolutely no creativity in the geenration ( a requirement for
atracting copyright). Any you certainly could not tack on a different
license on the generated file than on the files from which is was
generated (ie, its only copyright might be as a derived work).

> Thanks for filing the bug report.  More details for those interested in:
> http://bugs.ntp.org/2214
> Cheers,
> Dave Hart

More information about the questions mailing list