Closed josch closed 5 months ago
Also not a lawyer, but FYI: The license here refers to use of BTstack itself. BTstack is not included in the pico-sdk repository; it is a sub-module (in github) and is licensed with these terms https://github.com/bluekitchen/btstack/blob/master/LICENSE by default (LICENSE.RP is a more permissive license for use with our product)
The files in the src/rp2_common/pico_btstack
are not part of BTstack, and are licensed under the regular BSD-3-Clause license of the SDK
cc @ghollingworth @mringwal
Thank you for looking into this! The git submodule is located under lib/btstack
. If the files in src/rp2_common/pico_btstack
are licensed under BSD, what is the meaning of this LICENSE
file?
https://github.com/raspberrypi/pico-sdk/blob/master/src/rp2_common/pico_btstack/LICENSE.RP
the LICENSE.RP refers to the files under lib/btstack
; perhaps that could be more clear.
I now read that it actually says exactly that in src/rp2_common/pico_btstack/doc.h
:
A supplemental license for BTstack (in addition to the stock BTstack licensing terms) is provided here https://github.com/raspberrypi/pico-sdk/blob/master/src/rp2_common/pico_btstack/LICENSE.RP
Closing, because there is no bug, just a misunderstanding about what source code the LICENSE.RP
file actually applies to.
Hi,
I'm not a lawyer, so there might actually be no problem. I was made aware of this problem by Thorsten Alteholz who reviewed my Debian packaging of pico-sdk. The files inside
src/rp2_common/pico_btstack
are distributed under the following terms:So essentially, the right to copy, store and transmit BTstack is only granted to "Customers" which are defined as "purchaser of a Product". Github.com, which you are using to host this code, probably did not purchase any product, so they are probably not a customer and are thus not granted the permission to copy, store or transmit BTstack.
Or is the copyright information maybe incorrect and other terms apply to it?
Thanks!