Re: Bug#56166: base-files: copyright in motd is outdated (fwd)
On Jan 25, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Well, my question is more a "do we really want to claim ownership of it?"
> than a "do we really have the right to copyright Debian as a whole?".
>
> I remember that the Simtel archives were reorganized some time ago so that
> all the free software (including djgpp and the GNU software) was put out
> of the "collection" (of which Simtel claimed a "compilation copyright").
> [ Maybe this was done upon RMS request, I don't know ].
>
> Is claming ownership of Debian as a whole within the spirit of the free
> software world?
So long as we use a DFSG-compliant license for the distribution, I
can't see a problem.
There may be a weakness in that we don't have an explicit license for
the distribution, though. In any case, SPI holds the copyright
whether or not we announce it to the world or not (per discussion
about the Berne Convention)...
If we DO need a license for the distribution, something short and to
the point (do whatever the hell you want with it, but don't sue us)
seems reasonable enough; I like Branden's license for the X packages
personally.
===
Copyright 1996-2000 Software in the Public Interest, Inc.
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining
a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the
"Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including
without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish,
distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to
permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to
the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.
IN NO EVENT SHALL SOFTWARE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, INC. BE LIABLE FOR
ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF
CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION
WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
Except as contained in this notice, the name of Software in the Public
Interest, Inc. shall not be used in advertising or otherwise to
promote the sale, use or other dealings in this Software without prior
written authorization from Software in the Public Interest, Inc.
===
In essence: Don't sue us, don't use SPI's name as an endorsement, but
otherwise go forth and multiply.
The Python license makes the same basic point, but you have to fiddle
with the wording some if you're not CWI ;-)
Chris
--
=============================================================================
| Chris Lawrence | Get Debian GNU/Linux CDROMs |
| <quango@watervalley.net> | http://www.lordsutch.com/cds/ |
| | |
| Open Directory Editor | This address has been spam-proofed. |
| http://dmoz.org/ | All spam goes to your postmaster. |
=============================================================================
Reply to: