www/policy.html - view

Return to policy.html CVS log

Up to [local] / www

File: [local] / www / policy.html (download) (as text)

Revision 1.2, Fri Jun 13 11:52:20 1997 UTC (26 years, 11 months ago) by grr
Branch: MAIN
Changes since 1.1: +12 -12 lines

correct typos and grammer...

<!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 by OpenBSD.">
</head>

<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#000000" LINK="#23238E">

<img alt="[OpenBSD]" SRC="images/smalltitle.gif">

<h1>OpenBSD Copyright Policy</h1>
<p>
Copyright law is complex, OpenBSD policy is simple - OpenBSD strives to
maintain the spirit of the original Berkeley Unix copyrights.
</p>
<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>
<p>
While this means that OpenBSD is has the same broad applicability as
the material it was derived from, it also follows that OpenBSD can not
include some material which includes more restrictive copyrights, or
must limit it's scope - for example GPL style copyrights are not
acceptable for inclusion in the kernel or what would constitute a
"binary release" of OpenBSD.
</p>
<h3>Copyright Law</h3>
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>
<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>
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 be
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>
<p>
It is vitally important to understand that copyrights are broad protections
as defined by national and international copyright law, not assertions of
the copyright holder as to what might or might be copyrighted, nor the
conditions for use imposed by the copyright holder.
</p>
<h3>Permissions - the flip side</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 allow uses
permission to use a work beyond that which 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 any use of the material, at
the other highly restrictive releases that actually grant no additional
rights or impose restrictive, discriminatory or impractical conditions on
use of the work.
</p>
<p>
Again, the important points to note are 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 the original work, nor impose more restrictive
conditions for that work.
</p>
<p>
When a party asserting copyright rights removes prior copyright notices
or releases from a work, or attempts to impose permissions or conditions
that are in conflict with the permissions or conditions imposed by the
originator of the work, these conditions are not binding on the original
work.  In fact, if their permissions or conditions are contrary to those
asserted by the copyright holder of the original work, that party is
probably setting up a situation where they no longer have permission to
use the work at all, let along impose conditions on its use.
</p>
<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>
<h3>Specific Cases</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&amp;T<dd><p>
While AT&amp;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&amp;T copyrights, or material to which
AT&amp;T has abandoned it's copyright or included licensing terms similar
to the Berkeley terms.  No material subject to restrictive AT&amp;T
copyrights can be included in OpenBSD.
</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 is 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&amp;T copyrights, which prevents the general
distribution of Mach sources.
</p>
<dt>GNU General Public License, GPL, 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.  While this may be a noble
goal 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
of OpenBSD, though GPL tools may be included as development tools or as
part of the system at are "optional" and where there is no adequate substitute.
</p>
<dt>NetBSD<dd><p>
Much of OpenBSD is largely based on NetBSD, since some of the OpenBSD
developers were involved in the NetBSD project and the general NetBSD
license terms are compatible with the Berkeley license and permit such
use.  Since that time, individuals associated with the NetBSD project
or the "NetBSD Foundation" have inserted stricter conditions in the
copyrights of parts of the NetBSD software.  Regardless of the
legality/propriety of these actions, material including such restrictive
conditions or derived from that material subsequent to imposition of
these restrictions can not be included in OpenBSD.
</p>
<dt>FreeBSD<dd><p>
Most of FreeBSD is also based on Berkeley licensed material or include
copyright notices based on the Berkeley model.  Such material can be
included in OpenBSD, while parts that are subject to GPL or various
individual copyright terms can not be include 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 additional copyright claims
of the distributing organization, either as a compilation or on material
included that's not part of the Linux core.
</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 "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 it is offered
without restrictions.
</dl>

<hr>
<a href=index.html><img src=back.gif border=0 alt=OpenBSD></a> 
<a href=mailto:www@openbsd.org>www@openbsd.org</a>
<br><small>$OpenBSD: policy.html,v 1.2 1997/06/13 11:52:20 grr Exp $</small>

</body>
</html>