We are looking at packaging coremark-pro, a benchmarking tool:
It's licensed under the Apache License 2.0, which is fine, but comes
with an Acceptable Use Agreement tied to the authors' trademarks:
Most of it seems like standard trademark protection boilerplate, but
this section in particular seems concerning:
4.1. Publication of Results. A "Commercial COREMARK-PRO License" from
EEMBC is required for Licensee to disclose, reference, or publish test
results generated by COREMARK-PRO in Licensee’s marketing of any of
Licensee’s commercially‐available, product‐related materials,
including, but not limited to product briefs, website, product
brochures, product datasheets, or any white paper or article made
available for public consumption.
Is this fine, or is this considered 'legally encumbered' per
Michel Alexandre Salim
Assuming an upstream tarball contains one example file under the BSD license
with the following usage restriction:
* You acknowledge that Software is not designed, licensed or intended for
* use in the design, construction, operation or maintenance of any nuclear
Can we rm that nonfree file in %prep, or do we need to strip it from the
tarball as well?
My assumption is that we strip content that we cannot even re-distribute from
SRPM, which should not be the case here, but I am not sure.