Eclipse signs up Black Duck

Posted Sep 7, 2006 14:46 UTC (Thu) by sepreece (subscriber, #19270) [Link]

Not sure about other licenses, but from a GPL perspective, wouldn't inclusion in the database be "mere aggregation" that wouldn't require that the rest of the database be GPLed, even if the actual code were included?

Alternatively, it could be argued that what is in the database is simply a description of the original code, not the code itself and not an object-code version of the code, at least in the normal sense of "object". Assuming the original code can't be reconstructed from the signatures in the database, it probably wouldn't be considered a "translation". You could also argue that building that description was, at most, "use" of the code.

Of course, you could also argue the other side. It's not at all clear how the license would be read for something like this, that is entirely orthogonal to the normal use of code.

On the other hand, why would anyone want to claim it was infringing? It certainly doesn't interfere with the market for the original code and the use of Black Duck is presumably to the benefit of free software projects...