File: [local] / www / policy.html (download) (as text)
Revision 1.17, Tue Jun 18 01:44:06 2002 UTC (21 years, 11 months ago) by jsyn
Branch: MAIN
Changes since 1.16: +2 -2 lines
make the OpenBSD logo on each page a link back to index.html; from
s@smith.net, ok deraadt@
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML Strict//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title>OpenBSD Copyright Policy</title>
<link rev=made href=mailto:www@openbsd.org>
<meta name="resource-type" content="document">
<meta name="description" content="the OpenBSD copyright policy page">
<meta name="keywords" content="openbsd,copyright">
<meta name="distribution" content="global">
<meta name="copyright" content="This document copyright 1996-2002 by OpenBSD.">
</head>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#000000" LINK="#23238E">
<a href="index.html"><img alt="[OpenBSD]" height="30" width="141" src="images/smalltitle.gif" border="0"></a>
<p>
<h2><font color=#e00000>Copyright Policy</font><hr></h2>
<dl>
<li><h3><font color=#e00000>Goal</font></h3><p>
Copyright law is complex, OpenBSD policy is simple - OpenBSD strives to
maintain the spirit of the original Berkeley Unix copyrights.
<p>
OpenBSD can exist as it does today because of the example set by the
Computer Systems Research Group at Berkeley and the battles which they
and others fought to create a relatively un-encumbered Unix source
distribution.
<p>
The ability of a <strong>freely redistributable</strong> "Berkeley" Unix
to move forward on a competitive basis with other operating systems depends
on the willingness of the various development groups to exchange code amongst
themselves and with other projects.
Understanding the legal issues surrounding copyright is fundamental to
the ability to exchange and re-distribute code, while honoring the spirit of
the copyright and concept of attribution is fundamental to promoting the
cooperation of the people involved.
<p>
<li><h3><font color=#e00000>The Berkeley Copyright</font></h3><p>
The Berkeley copyright poses no restrictions on private or commercial
use of the software and imposes only simple and uniform requirements
for maintaining copyright notices in redistributed versions and
crediting the originator of the material <strong>only</strong> in
advertising.
<p>
For instance:
<p>
<pre>
* Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1990, 1991, 1993
* The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
*
* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
* modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
* are met:
* 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
* documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
* 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software
* must display the following acknowledgement:
* This product includes software developed by the University of
* California, Berkeley and its contributors.
* 4. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors
* may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
* without specific prior written permission.
*
* THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
* ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
* IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
* ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
* FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
* DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
* OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
* HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
* LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
* OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
* SUCH DAMAGE.
*
</pre>
<p>
(Note: In some parts of the system, you may find that terms 3 and 4 have been
removed, making things even easier)
<p>
Because the OpenBSD copyright imposes no conditions beyond those
imposed by the Berkeley copyright, OpenBSD can hope to share the same
wide distribution and applicability as the Berkeley distributions.
It follows however, that OpenBSD can not include material which
includes copyrights which are more restrictive than the Berkeley
copyright, or must relegate this material to a secondary status,
i.e. OpenBSD as a whole is freely redistributable, but some optional
components may not be.
<p>
<li><h3><font color=#e00000>Copyright Law</font></h3><p>
While the overall subject of copyright law is far beyond the scope of
this document, some basics are in order. Under the current copyright law,
copyrights are implicit in the creation of a new work and reside with
the creator, unless otherwise assigned. In general the copyright applies
only to the new work, not the material the work was derived from, nor
those portions of the derivative material included in the new work.
<p>
Copyright law admits to three general categories of works:
<dl>
<dt>Original Work
<dd>A new work that is not derived from an existing work.
<dt>Derivative Work
<dd>Work that is derived from, includes or amends existing works.
<dt>Compilations
<dd>A work that is a compilation of existing new and derivative works.
</dl>
<p>
The fundamental concept is that there is primacy of the copyright, that
is a copyright of a derivative work does not affect the rights held by
the owner of the copyright of the original work, rather only the part
added. Likewise the copyright of a compilation does not affect the rights
of the owner of the included works, only the compilation as an entity.
<p>
It is vitally important to understand that copyrights are broad protections
as defined by national and international copyright law. The "copyright
notices" usually included in source files are not copyrights, but rather
notices that a party asserts that they hold copyright to the material or
to part of the material. Typically these notices are associated with
license terms which grant permissions subject to copyright law and with
disclaimers that state the position of the copyright holder/distributor
with respect to liability surrounding use of the material.
<p>
<li><h3><font color=#e00000>Permissions - the flip side</font></h3><p>
Because copyrights arise from the creation of a work, rather than through
a registration process, there needs to be a practical way to extend
permission to use a work beyond what might be allowed by "fair use"
provisions of the copyright laws.
<p>
This permission typically takes the form of a "release" or "license"
included in the work, which grants the additional uses beyond those
granted by copyright law, usually subject to a variety of conditions.
At one extreme sits "public domain" where the originator asserts that
he imposes no restrictions on use of the material, at the other
restrictive clauses that actually grant no additional rights or impose
restrictive, discriminatory or impractical conditions on use of the work.
<p>
Again, an important point to note is that the release and conditions can
only apply to the portion of the work that was originated by the copyright
holder - the holder of a copyright on a derivative work can neither
grant additional permissions for use of the original work, nor impose more
restrictive conditions for use of that work.
<p>
Because copyright arises from the creation of a work and not the text
or a registration process, removing or altering a copyright notice or
associated release terms has no bearing on the existence of the copyright,
rather all that is accomplished to whatever rights the person making the
modifications had to use the material in the first place. Likewise, adding
terms and conditions in conflict with the original terms and conditions
does not supersede them, rather it casts doubts on the rights of the person
making the amendments to use the material and creates confusion as to
whether anyone can use amended version or derivatives thereof.
<p>
Finally, releases are generally binding on the material that they
are distributed with. This means that if the originator of a work distributes
that work with a release granting certain permissions, those permissions
apply as stated, without discrimination, to all persons legitimately
possessing a copy of the work. That means that having granted a permission,
the copyright holder can not retroactively say that an individual or class
of individuals are no longer granted those permissions. Likewise should
the copyright holder decide to "go commercial" he can not revoke permissions
already granted for the use of the work as distributed, though he may impose
more restrictive permissions in his future distributions of that work.
<p>
<li><h3><font color=#e00000>Specific Cases</font></h3><p>
This section attempts to summarize the position of OpenBSD relative to
some commonly encountered copyrights.
<p>
<dl>
<dt>Berkeley<dd><p>
The Berkeley copyright is the model for the OpenBSD copyright. It retains
the rights of the copyright holder, while imposing minimal conditions on
the use of the copyrighted material. Material with Berkeley copyrights,
or copyrights closely adhering to the Berkeley model can generally be
included in OpenBSD.
<p>
<dt>AT&T<dd><p>
While AT&T holds the copyrights to much "Unix" code and documentation,
OpenBSD is based largely on Berkeley (BSD) distributions that contain only
material known to be free of AT&T copyrights, or material to which
AT&T has abandoned its copyright or included licensing terms similar
to the Berkeley terms. No material subject to restrictive AT&T
copyrights can be included in OpenBSD.
<p>
Examples of AT&T code, included subject to non-restrictive copyrights,
include some system sources such as init_main.c and the AT&T version
of awk.
<p>
<dt>DEC, Sun, other manufacturers/software houses.<dd><p>
In general OpenBSD does not include material copyrighted by manufacturers
or software houses. Material may be included where the copyright owner has
granted general permission for reuse without conditions, with terms similar
to the Berkeley copyright, or where the material is the product of an
employee and the employer's copyright notice effectively releases any
rights they might have to the work.
<p>
<dt>Carnegie-Mellon (CMU, Mach)<dd><p>
The Carnegie-Mellon copyright is similar to the Berkeley copyright, except
that it requests that derivative works be made available to Carnegie-Mellon.
Because this is only a request and not a condition, such material can still
be included in OpenBSD. It should be noted that existing versions of Mach
are still subject to AT&T copyrights, which prevents the general
distribution of Mach sources.
<p>
<dt>Apache<dd><p>
The Apache copyright is similar to the Berkeley copyright, except
that it stipulates that products derived from the code may not
have "Apache" in their name. The purpose of this clause is to
avoid a situation in which another party releases a modified version
of the code named in such a way to make users think that it is the
"official" version. This is not an issue with OpenBSD because
OpenBSD is a <strong>Compilation</strong>, and not a
<strong>Derived Work</strong>.
<p>
<dt>GNU General Public License, GPL, LGPL, copyleft, etc.<dd><p>
The GNU Public License and licenses modeled on it impose the restriction
that source code must be distributed or made available for all works that
are derivatives of the GNU copyrighted code.
<p>
While this may be a noble strategy in terms of software sharing, it is a
condition that is typically unacceptable for commercial use of software.
As a consequence, software bound by the GPL terms can not be included in
the kernel or "runtime" of OpenBSD, though software subject to GPL terms
may be included as development tools or as part of the system that are
"optional" as long as such use does not result in OpenBSD as a whole
becoming subject to the GPL terms.
<p>
As an example, some ports include GNU Floating Point Emulation - this is
optional and the system can be built without it or with an alternative
emulation package. Another example is the use of GCC and other GNU tools in
the OpenBSD tool chain - it is quite possible to distribute a system for
many applications without a tool chain, or the distributor can choose to
include a tool chain as an optional bundle which conforms to the GPL terms.
<p>
<dt>NetBSD<dd><p>
Much of OpenBSD is originally based on and evolved from NetBSD, since some
of the OpenBSD developers were involved in the NetBSD project. The general
NetBSD license terms are compatible with the Berkeley license and permit
such use. Material subject <strong>only</strong> to the general NetBSD
license can generally be included in OpenBSD.
<p>
In the past, NetBSD has included material copyrighted by individuals
who have imposed license conditions beyond that of the general
NetBSD license, but granted the NetBSD Foundation license to
distribute the material. Such material can not be included in
OpenBSD as long as the conditions imposed are at odds with the
OpenBSD license terms or releases from those terms are offered on
a discriminatory basis.
<p>
<dt>FreeBSD<dd><p>
Most of FreeBSD is also based on Berkeley licensed material or includes
copyright notices based on the Berkeley model. Such material can be
included in OpenBSD, while those parts that are subject to GPL or
various individual copyright terms that are at odds with the OpenBSD license
can not be included in OpenBSD.
<p>
<dt>Linux<dd><p>
Most of Linux is subject to GPL style licensing terms and therefore
can not be included in OpenBSD. Individual components may be eligible,
subject to the terms of the originator's copyright notices. Note that
Linux "distributions" may also be subject to additional copyright claims
of the distributing organization, either as a compilation or on material
included that is not part of the Linux core.
<p>
<dt>X, XFree86<dd><p>
X and XFree86 are not parts of OpenBSD, rather X or XFree86 is distributed
with many OpenBSD ports as a convenience to the user, subject to applicable
license terms.
<p>
<dt>Shareware, Charityware, Freeware, etc.<dd><p>
Most "shareware" copyright notices impose conditions for redistribution,
use or visibility that are at conflict with the OpenBSD project goals.
Review on a case-by-case basis is required as to whether the wording
of the conditions is acceptable in terms of conditions being requested vs.
demanded and whether the spirit of the conditions is compatible with
goals of the OpenBSD project.
<p>
<dt>Public Domain<dd><p>
While material that is truly entered into the "Public Domain" can be
included in OpenBSD, review is required on a case by case basis.
Frequently the "public domain" assertion is made by someone who does
not really hold all rights under Copyright law to grant that status or
there are a variety of conditions imposed on use. For a work to be
truly in the "Public Domain" all rights are abandoned and the material
is offered without restrictions.
<p>
</dl>
</dl>
<hr>
<a href=index.html><img height=24 width=24 src=back.gif border=0 alt=OpenBSD></a>
<a href=mailto:www@openbsd.org>www@openbsd.org</a>
<br><small>$OpenBSD: policy.html,v 1.17 2002/06/18 01:44:06 jsyn Exp $</small>
</body>
</html>
![[BACK]](/icons/back.gif){kind=icon}
Return to policy.html CVS log ![[TXT]](/icons/text.gif){kind=icon}
![[DIR]](/icons/dir.gif){kind=icon}
Up to [local] / www