Обсуждение: How to include PostgreSQL Copyright notice
Greetings,
The company I work for has decided to use PostgreSQL database as
its primary db for its major product. PostgreSQL's major role is
for data storage and retrieval by various applications and UIs.
We are about to release this new version of our software using
PostgreSQL as part of our distribution (in the form of a CDROM)
to our clients.
Our code uses PostgreSQL via C API, JDBC and Php interfaces.
There seems to be a slight uncertainty on what and how should our
software provide all that is required to conform to the
PostgreSQL (BSD) licensing terms and conditions.
Our intention is to have PostgreSQL be installed from our
software distribution CD in binary form.
I was hoping asking the PostgreSQL developer and user community
would help answer this question.
In particular:
- Is including the COPYRIGHT file from the PostgreSQL sources as
part of our distribution be:
+ Sufficient?
+ A starting point?
- Do we need to have a hardcopy of the contents in COPYRIGHT
file included with our hardcopy documentation?
- Should any of our software display PostgreSQL Copyright
information:
+ upon execution?
+ upon execution with either --version or --copyright
option?
What about:
+ Php pages?
+ Daemon processes running in the background?
+ Command line processes (those similar to psql)?
Any information that can be communicated/supplied to us would be
greatly appreciated.
About the only references I found from the PostgreSQL
mailing-list archives was the following which doesn't quite cover
this topic:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2002-03/msg00972.php
Thank you very much,
--
patrick keshishian
Pioneer Digital Technologies
Gnu __ _
-o)/ / (_)__ __ ____ __
/\\ /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /
_\_v __/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
> The company I work for has decided to use PostgreSQL database as
> its primary db for its major product. PostgreSQL's major role is
> for data storage and retrieval by various applications and UIs.
Good choice :)
> - Is including the COPYRIGHT file from the PostgreSQL sources as
> part of our distribution be:
> + Sufficient?
> + A starting point?
It is (probably) sufficient. If you have documentation on your product,
then it would be good form to acknowledge the copyright (at least
briefly) there also.
> - Do we need to have a hardcopy of the contents in COPYRIGHT
> file included with our hardcopy documentation?
You can reformat the copyright to the typeset style that the rest of
your documentation uses. And you can refer to the full copyright which
might be included elsewhere in your distro.
> - Should any of our software display PostgreSQL Copyright
> information:
> + upon execution?
> + upon execution with either --version or --copyright
> option?
I don't believe that is necessary, unless you are using an existing
interface which already displays that information. Then we might
consider it bad form (but probably not a copyright offense) to remove
it.
However, the BSD license does not preclude modification of the code, and
the license does not insist that *every* place the copyright now appears
should always behave the same way.
> What about:
> + Php pages?
> + Daemon processes running in the background?
> + Command line processes (those similar to psql)?
You are building on top of PostgreSQL. Your apps have no direct runtime
obligation to explicitly acknowledge copyright on the layers underneath.
Your distribution should acknowledge copyright on those portions you
include. The goal is to not percolate the PostgreSQL name up into your
application, but to acknowledge the copyright on the portions where it
is appropriate.
You will note that the copyright is not worded to retain strong rights
for the PostgreSQL developers, but rather to make certain that we do not
assume an obligation of liability under any circumstances. Your
customers should be aware of that where necessary and your layered
product is where the "buck stops" for liability issues.
It is important to not unduly obscure those points for your customers.
But the copyright requirements are mild: distribute it with the binary
and/or sources, distribute it with PostgreSQL docs or docs derived from
our docs, and (best to) make it available somewhere reasonable in your
application docs if they cover database issues.
This is not a definitive answer, and others may speak up to help clarify
it. But on the whole you are probably already headed in the right
direction by trying to include the copyright notice *somewhere*. The
rest is in the "good form" category.
hth
- Thomas
"patrick k ." <patrick+pgsql@pioneerdigital.com> writes: > There seems to be a slight uncertainty on what and how should our > software provide all that is required to conform to the > PostgreSQL (BSD) licensing terms and conditions. By and large, the BSD license doesn't put *any* requirements on you. We'd get unhappy if you tried to claim you owned Postgres, but short of that you can include it in your product without any problem. > - Is including the COPYRIGHT file from the PostgreSQL sources as > part of our distribution be: > + Sufficient? > + A starting point? Sufficient, certainly; some would say you needn't do even that. If you wanted to mention "This product uses PostgreSQL, which you can learn more about at http://www.postgresql.org/" then everyone would be happy. You need not do that, but it'd be a polite thing to do. > - Do we need to have a hardcopy of the contents in COPYRIGHT > file included with our hardcopy documentation? Not if you don't want to. > - Should any of our software display PostgreSQL Copyright > information: Not required. The strictest reading of the BSD license is that the notice has to be present somewhere in your distribution. Putting it on a splash screen is surely more than is needed. regards, tom lane