License issue: terminal.py contains code licensed under Creative Commons

[karabill]

Code Sample, a copy-pastable example if possible

NA

Problem description

The file pandas/io/formats/terminal.py contains source code taken from stack overflow (it explicitly says this in the terminal.py file). However, the source code that exist in stack overflow is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike, see: https://stackoverflow.com/help/licensing.

Pandas claims to be BSD 3 compliant, but it actually has code in terminal.py that is not under BSD.

Keep in mind that the part of the code that is under creative commons is affecting the python 2 implementation. The python 3 implementation does not need the code from stack overflow. So, some possible solutions would be (there might be other options that I am not aware of):

1. Remove the code that is under CC. This will make the terminal.py unusable for python 2.
2. Use backports.shutil_get_terminal_size and replace the code under CC. This will make pandas depend on the backports.shutil_get_terminal_size package.
3. Provide a brand new implementation for the part of terminal.py that is under CC.

Expected Output

NA

Output of pd.show_versions()

NA

[TomAugspurger]

We attribute that code back to the source, so everything seems OK. Is that incorrect?

[karabill]

Yes, there is an attribution (without link to the license).

But there are two requirements (from https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/):

1. Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
2. ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

So, the terminal.py file contains code that was under CC license. By providing this part of code as part of the pandas code you are changing the license of that code from CC to BSD, which is not permitted.

[TomAugspurger]

Hmm

If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute

your contributions under the same license <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/#> as the original. Sounds like changes to the original must be distributed under the same license. Not the entire library.

…

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 6:25 AM, Vasileios Karavasilis < ***@***.***> wrote: Yes, there is an attribution (without link to the license). But there are two requirements (from https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-sa/3.0/): 1. Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. 2. ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. So, the terminal.py file contains code that was under CC license. By providing this part of code as part of the pandas code you are changing the license of that code from CC to BSD, which is not permitted. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#21074 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABQHIhgk8bfB9FEPDL87aEG1v6z6-Ss7ks5tzAyigaJpZM4UA3tT> .

[jorisvandenbossche]

The StackOverflow answer is on its turn based on this: http://code.activestate.com/recipes/440694-determine-size-of-console-window-on-windows/, which is PSF licensed (or at least the windows part).

Can we ask the author if our relicensing is OK? (I don't know if this would be sufficient)

[jreback]

so newer code is MIT (which is ok with BSD)
https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/271080/the-mit-license-clarity-on-using-code-on-stack-overflow-and-stack-exchange

but looks like this is an older contribution

[jreback]

https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/324/are-permissive-licenses-mit-bsd-zlib-compatible-with-cc-by

is relevant

i believe we just need attribution which we have

[jorisvandenbossche]

@jreback your last link is about CC-BY, not CC-BY-SA, so I think the share-alike part is relevant here

[karabill]

Can we ask the author if our relicensing is OK? (I don't know if this would be sufficient)

Yes, if we can get license or permission from the original author, it solves all the problems. The difficult point is, the answer was posted in 2011, and there is no contact info in the StackOverflow, we are even not sure if could reach the author.

i believe we just need attribution which we have

CC-Attributin-ShareAlike, this proposal only meet with “Attribution”, the problem is the “ShareAlike”.

PS: I go t these answers from the people familiar with this kind of issues in the company that I am working.

[jorisvandenbossche]

The difficult point is, the answer was posted in 2011, and there is no contact info in the StackOverflow, we are even not sure if could reach the author.

The linux code is actually from another answer, and that author has a github profile link. And for the answer you linked to, I am going to do a wild guess and try to ping @harcokuppens (sorry if you are the wrong Harco Kuppens!)

---

@harcokuppens @weissi for some context that I am pinging you here: we used the code from your answers to this SO question: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/566746/how-to-get-linux-console-window-width-in-python. Since the pandas library is BSD, and SO answers back then were this CC-BY-SA, that is not compatible. So therefore the question to you both: are you OK with us re-using your code snippet in a BSD licenced library? (and agreeing means I think that you are OK with relicensing this code-snippet to BSD, but no expert on that)

[harcokuppens]

On 17/05/2018 11:19, Joris Van den Bossche wrote: The difficult point is, the answer was posted in 2011, and there is no contact info in the StackOverflow, we are even not sure if could reach the author. The linux code is actually from another answer, and that author has a github profile link. And for the answer you linked to, I am going to do a wild guess and try to ping @harcokuppens <https://github.com/harcokuppens> (sorry if you are the wrong Harco Kuppens!) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ @harcokuppens <https://github.com/harcokuppens> @weissi <https://github.com/weissi> for some context that I am pinging you here: we used the code from your answers to this SO question: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/566746/how-to-get-linux-console-window-width-in-python. Since the pandas library is BSD, and SO answers back then were this CC-BY-SA, that is compatible. So therefore the question to you both: are you OK with us re-using your code snippet in a BSD licenced library? (and agreeing means I think that you are OK with relicensing this code-snippet to BSD, but no expert on that)

Hi, as you can see in my answer I just combined two solutions found elsewhere. I even mention their sources in my answer. I'm ok that you use my solution for combining these two solutions in one function. Best regards, Harco Kuppens ps. nice to hear somebody is using my comment ;)

…

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#21074 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFUQ8bNAaGgR88ey-5uHTbUhvrl_CMG4ks5tzUCTgaJpZM4UA3tT>.

[karabill]

so newer code is MIT (which is ok with BSD) https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/271080/the-mit-license-clarity-on-using-code-on-stack-overflow-and-stack-exchange

I received more clarification on this. It seems that this proposal did not make it. There is a follow up thread: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/272956/a-new-code-license-the-mit-this-time-with-attribution-required?cb=1. There is the sentence in there: The changes proposed here have been delayed indefinitely.. Moreover, if you check the https://stackexchange.com/legal#licensing, it does not contain any reference to MIT.

[jorisvandenbossche]

Hi, as you can see in my answer I just combined two solutions found elsewhere. I even mention their sources in my answer.

@harcokuppens Thanks for the quick answer! (but still, it is your recombination in functions we used verbatim :-))

[weissi]

Hi there, I'm totally fine too and hereby dual license my code from https://stackoverflow.com/a/566752 under BSD.

Is that statement enough? Or should I write some more?

[jorisvandenbossche]

I think that is fine. Thanks for the answer!