Incorrect LicenseRef-scancode being used

[ariel11]

ClearlyDefined picked an incorrect License Ref ID for this component - https://clearlydefined.io/definitions/npm/npmjs/@ag-grid-enterprise/status-bar/30.2.1/30.2.1.

I don't think another company’s EULA should get “LicenseRef-scancode-warranty-disclaimer,” which is described as a “catch all license” often used by Microsoft in its source code.

However, there does not appear to be a License Ref for the AG GRID ENTERPRISE EULA. How can I nominate that for a LicenseRef-scancode ID?

Also, I hope ClearlyDefined is not defaulting to the closest LicenseRef-scancode ID it thinks it has? If there's not a match, ClearlyDefined should still put NOASSERTION, correct?

[ariel11]

@elrayle - FYI. Thank you!

@capfei and @AE49 - FYI

[elrayle]

@ariel11 For questions or improvements to the licenses coming from ScanCode, you can see your options for support in the scancode-licensedb support page.

Screen shot here for reference. If you go to the support page, there are links.

[ariel11]

Thanks for the pointer @elrayle on where to propose new scancode license refs. To confirm - I think this is the correct location for the first part of this issue, correct? --> ClearlyDefined selecting an incorrect scancode license ref?

[elrayle]

@ariel11 I added an issue to scancode-licensedb using primarily your description in this issue.

• a company’s EULA is identified as “LicenseRef-scancode-warranty-disclaimer” aboutcode-org/scancode-toolkit#4082

There is another issue in scancode related to whether "unknown" licenses should be NOASSERTION. The issue has a long discussion, so the link jumps ahead to a comment that is more closely related.

• unexpected LicenseRefs scancode-toolkit/issue #3974

---

NOTE: There still may be work on the CD side to address:

I hope ClearlyDefined is not defaulting to the closest LicenseRef-scancode ID it thinks it has? If there's not a match, ClearlyDefined should still put NOASSERTION, correct?