headers
Pauli Virtanen | 13 Aug 00:21
Favicon

TOMS 526 license?


I noticed that code from ACM TOMS 526 was added to a branch in the Scipy 
repository.

This may be a silly question, but I'll ask it just to be on the safe 
side: in case this code is going to eventually land in Scipy proper, did 
you check the ACM license conditions? It says here:

	http://toms.acm.org/Authors.html#CopyrightandUseAgreement

that the TOMS codes fall by default under the ACM license, which is not 
really either BSD or GPL compatible. (Unfortunately, the netlib.org codes 
don't carry a license blurb...) Or has the situation for 526 been 
otherwise arranged, or was the situation different in 1978 when it was 
published?

--

-- 
Pauli Virtanen
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Robert Kern | 13 Aug 01:31

Re: TOMS 526 license?

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 17:25, Pauli Virtanen <pav <at> iki.fi> wrote:
>
> I noticed that code from ACM TOMS 526 was added to a branch in the Scipy
> repository.
>
> This may be a silly question, but I'll ask it just to be on the safe
> side: in case this code is going to eventually land in Scipy proper, did
> you check the ACM license conditions? It says here:
>
>        http://toms.acm.org/Authors.html#CopyrightandUseAgreement
>
> that the TOMS codes fall by default under the ACM license, which is not
> really either BSD or GPL compatible. (Unfortunately, the netlib.org codes
> don't carry a license blurb...) Or has the situation for 526 been
> otherwise arranged, or was the situation different in 1978 when it was
> published?

Akima was an employee of the Federal Government (US Dept of Commerce).
Near as I can tell, the code is public domain, and the ACM cannot
claim copyright over it.

--

-- 
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
 -- Umberto Eco
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Robert Kern | 13 Aug 01:31

Re: TOMS 526 license?

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 18:31, Robert Kern <robert.kern <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 17:25, Pauli Virtanen <pav <at> iki.fi> wrote:
>>
>> I noticed that code from ACM TOMS 526 was added to a branch in the Scipy
>> repository.
>>
>> This may be a silly question, but I'll ask it just to be on the safe
>> side: in case this code is going to eventually land in Scipy proper, did
>> you check the ACM license conditions? It says here:
>>
>>        http://toms.acm.org/Authors.html#CopyrightandUseAgreement
>>
>> that the TOMS codes fall by default under the ACM license, which is not
>> really either BSD or GPL compatible. (Unfortunately, the netlib.org codes
>> don't carry a license blurb...) Or has the situation for 526 been
>> otherwise arranged, or was the situation different in 1978 when it was
>> published?
>
> Akima was an employee of the Federal Government (US Dept of Commerce).
> Near as I can tell, the code is public domain, and the ACM cannot
> claim copyright over it.

But it's worth asking, regardless. Alan?

--

-- 
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Alan G Isaac | 13 Aug 15:51
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: TOMS 526 license?

Robert Kern wrote:
> But it's worth asking, regardless. Alan? 

OK, I'll ask.

Cheers,
Alan
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Alan G Isaac | 13 Aug 15:44
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: TOMS 526 license?

Pauli Virtanen wrote:
> I noticed that code from ACM TOMS 526 was added to a branch in the Scipy 
> repository. 
> This may be a silly question, but I'll ask it just to be on the safe 
> side: in case this code is going to eventually land in Scipy proper, did 
> you check the ACM license conditions?

If this has not already been addressed, I recommend
contacting:

     Deborah Cotton, Copyright & Permissions
             permissions AT acm.org
     ACM Publications
     2 Penn Plaza, Suite 701**
     New York, NY 10121-0701

She has proved helfpul in releasing code to SciPy under
a BSD license in the past.

Cheers,
Alan Isaac

PS I'm happy to help with that process.
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Jonathan Guyer | 13 Aug 17:22
Favicon

Re: TOMS 526 license?


On Aug 13, 2008, at 9:44 AM, Alan G Isaac wrote:

> If this has not already been addressed, I recommend
> contacting:
>
>    Deborah Cotton, Copyright & Permissions
>            permissions AT acm.org
>    ACM Publications
>    2 Penn Plaza, Suite 701**
>    New York, NY 10121-0701
>
> She has proved helfpul in releasing code to SciPy under
> a BSD license in the past.

If for some reason that proves to be a problem, Robert is probably  
right about the implications of the code being developed by a DoC  
employee. The language we are told to use at NIST (also DoC) is:

This software was developed at the National Institute of Standards
and Technology by employees of the Federal Government in the course
of their official duties.  Pursuant to title 17 section 105 of the
United States Code this software is not subject to copyright
protection and is in the public domain.  <SOFTWARE> is an experimental
system.  NIST assumes no responsibility whatsoever for its use by
other parties, and makes no guarantees, expressed or implied, about
its quality, reliability, or any other characteristic.  We would
appreciate acknowledgement if the software is used.

This software can be redistributed and/or modified freely
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |

Gmane