{"id":"Intel","title":"Intel Open Source License","reviewed_on":"2026-09-15","reviewer":"Giray Havur","text_source":"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/spdx/license-list-data/main/text/Intel.txt","text_retrieved":true,"verdict":"created","summary":"The record models the Intel Open Source License, which is BSD-3-Clause word for word with one paragraph added about export law. The deontic model is therefore the BSD-3-Clause model: the three conditions as attribution and notice duties, and the endorsement clause as a dalicc:promote prohibition. The export paragraph is quoted in dalicc:additionalClauses.","findings":[{"rubric":3,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:permission","description":"The grant reads: \"Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met\". The record permits reproduce, distribute, modify, derive, display, present, commercial use, derivative works, modified works and the distribution fee, exactly as BSD-3-Clause does.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":5,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:duty","description":"The conditions are the three BSD conditions: the copyright notice, the list of conditions and the disclaimer must be retained in source redistributions and reproduced in binary redistributions, so cc:Attribution and cc:Notice are duties on distribute, modify and derive.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":4,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:prohibition","description":"The third condition reads: \"Neither the name of the Intel Corporation nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.\" That is dalicc:promote as a prohibition. dalicc:ChangeLicense is prohibited because the text requires the license itself to travel with every copy, which is the reading IscLicense and BSD-3-Clause take of the same clause. The MIT record does not carry the prohibition although its text has the same requirement, so the library is not uniform here. (Corrected on 2026-09-15 by the verification pass: see the rubric 3 finding on relicensing below.)","action":"applied"},{"rubric":6,"severity":"minor","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"The export paragraph is quoted verbatim. It states that the license adds no restriction of its own and leaves compliance to the licensee, which is a fact about the license that no deontic term carries.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":7,"severity":"info","field":"cc:jurisdiction","description":"The export paragraph describes United States export regulations as they stood in May 2000 but does not choose a legal system for the grant, so cc:jurisdiction stays dalicc:worldwide and the paragraph is quoted instead.","action":"none"},{"rubric":2,"severity":"info","field":"odrl:target","description":"One odrl:AssetCollection of dct:type dcmitype:Software, following BSD-3-Clause. The text licenses software in source and binary form.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":9,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"The consistency check with the axioms of dg_default returned no conflicts.","action":"none"},{"rubric":10,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"Intel, NCSA, Sleepycat, VSL-1.0 and OLDAP-2.8 are the BSD-form records of this review group and share the duty and prohibition shape of BSD-3-Clause. What separates them is what each adds: export law here, the MIT grant in NCSA, a source-code duty in Sleepycat, a naming condition in VSL-1.0 and a revision clause in OLDAP-2.8.","action":"none"},{"rubric":3,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:permission","description":"Library convention 15: a licence that asks for no reciprocity and no source code asks only that the notice travels with the copy, which is a duty on the acts it governs and not a bar on putting the copy under other terms. dalicc:ChangeLicense is therefore a permission here, and the prohibition the earlier reading wrote is removed. The text reads: \"Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: • Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.\" The permission carries the dalicc:compliantLicense duty, as Apache-2.0 does, because the notice has to survive the relicensing.","action":"applied"}],"family":"Permissive: MIT, ISC and BSD-like","port_of":null,"variant_kind":null,"notes":"Modelled from the SPDX plain text. The three conditions are a bullet list in the source; the quoted clauses are the disclaimer and export paragraphs, which are plain prose. dct:publisher names Intel Corporation, the licensor in the copyright line."}