Re: Non-free data in Poppler test suite

[Mark H Weaver]

Hi Ludovic and Marius,

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> Marius Bakke <marius@gnu.org> skribis:
>
>> So the million dollar question ... are these files okay to use for Guix?
>>
>> In my (non-lawyer) opinion, I have faith that Poppler developers would
>> not distribute files that are not freely redistributable, and that this
>> counts as "non-functional data" per FSDG guidelines:
>>
>>   https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html
>>
>> However, we failed to reach a consensus on #guix[0].  What do others
>> around here think?  Should we play it safe and disable Poppler tests?
>> Raise the issue with FSF?  Something else?
>
> IANAL, but… I would argue that these PDFs are “non-functional” in the
> sense that they do not have any impact on the functionality of Poppler.

I'm inclined to agree that the PDFs in Poppler's test suite are
"non-functional" for purposes of the FSDG.  However, even for
non-functional works, the FSDG requires that the license must allow
copying and redistribution, both for commercial and non-commercial
purposes.  Here's the relevant text from the FSDG:

  Non-functional Data

  Data that isn't functional, that doesn't do a practical job, is more
  of an adornment to the system's software than a part of it.  Thus, we
  don't insist on the free license criteria for non-functional data.  It
  can be included in a free system distribution as long as its license
  gives you permission to copy and redistribute, both for commercial and
  non-commercial purposes.  For example, [...]

  <https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html>

IANAL, but it seems fairly clear to me that the CC BY-NC-ND license does
*not* permit copying and redistribution for commercial purposes.
Specifically, section 4 paragraph 2 says:

  You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3
 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward
 commercial advantage or private monetary compensation.

  <https://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/legalcode>

Note that section 3 is where permission to copy and redistribute is
granted.

Therefore, I think that in order to comply with the FSDG, we should use
a snippet to remove any files covered by the CC BY-NC-ND license.

What do you think?

Thank you, Marius, for bringing this to our attention.

     Regards,
       Mark

-- 
Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice
but very few check the facts.  Ask me about <https://stallmansupport.org>.