Re: eawpats license [was: Timidity-patches eek]
In addition to David Given's warning, which I agree with and I find reason
enough to not consider eawpats DFSG-free, I add the following.
Andrew Suffield quoted the license for eawpats:
> So, basicly[sic] you can not use the analog drums or the pistol files in any
> commercial work. This is out of my hands. The rest of the patches are fully
> public domain as far as I know.
So, am I understanding this correctly: this person's patch set is made up of
two sets of other patches: one set for non-commercial use only, and the
other set is in the public domain? Due to the limitations of discussion via
e-mail, I'll assume I'm correct in this assessment.
> If you DO use this patch set in a commercial production, I'd like to hear
> about it. A free copy of the production might be nice too :)
These are suggestions. They can be ignored. But they make me wonder if the
author really understands what it means for a work to be in the public
domain?
> I release these patches as "fameware". If you use them in any non-private
> way, give me credit. These patches are not to be sold for profit (heaven
> forbid). They were free when I got them and so they shall remain.
Here's where my problem lies: regardless of which patch set is referred to
here (see above), the limitations don't matter; neither set of patch files
can have terms placed upon them. This person is trying to set terms for
works copyrighted to someone else (the for-non-commercial-use-only patches),
or this person is trying to set terms on works in the public domain.
Later Andrew Suffield asked:
> Aside from the absence of the standard clause about distributing
> modified versions, I am unsure of the clause prohibiting "sale for
> profit".
If I'm correct about the source of these files, it doesn't matter. The
author has no power to set terms for works in the public domain. If the
author has made derivative works based on public domain works, couldn't
Debian get copies of the modified files and use only the public domain parts
of those files? If possible, this would essentially work around the
non-DFSG-free "not to be sold for profit" clause.
So, are some subset of these patch set files really in the public domain or
not? Because those are the only potentially interesting files for Debian.
Reply to: