Repository navigation
License Mapping for BSD-3-Clause and BSD-4-Clause #205
Description
With this addition to license mappings in PR #195
The consequence is that the component antlr4 now maps to BSD-4-Clause when the intention of the antlr project is the the license should beBSD-3-Clause.
See LICENSE.txt
From antlr4 POM:
<licenses>
<license>
<name>The BSD License</name>
<url>http://www.antlr.org/license.html</url>
<distribution>repo</distribution>
</license>
</licenses>
So, is this a problem with cyclonedx-core-java license mapping, or is it a problem with antlr4 POM?
The consequence of thinking that a BSD-3-Clause is actually BSD-4-Clause is that the latter:
- Adds an "advertising clause" that requires an acknowledgment of the original source in all advertising material.
- Was rescinded in 1999
- Is not OSI-approved.
Activity
stevespringett commentedon Jun 5, 2022
According to wikipedia, "BSD License" is the 4-clause license. Thus CycloneDX-Core-Java is properly identifying the license from the antlr4 pom.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses
If the antlr4 project is licensed under BSD-3-Clause, then perhaps the project should explicitly state that using the
BSD-3-ClauseSPDX identifier.msymons commentedon Jun 5, 2022
@stevespringett, the POM for
antl4say "The BSD License" and not "BSD License". The wikipedia page says..ie, a reading of this is that "The BSD License" is 3-clause and not 4-clause.
So, is the license mapping in cyclonedx-core-java really correct on this point?
Having said that, I will most definitely try to get the
antlr4project to use theBSD-3-ClauseSPDX identifier.tmehnert commentedon Jun 22, 2022
The
antlr4project is proven to beBSD-3-Clause, see LICENSE.txt.msymons commentedon Feb 2, 2023
Yes, @tmehnert , that's because the license that you link to is the one is based on the PR that I submitted 😄