Re: bibindex should probably be GPLed.
Rafael Laboissiere <rafael@icp.inpg.fr> writes:
> I am moving this discussion to debian-legal in order to get an advice on how
> to proceed with this problem.
>
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2000 at 11:07:58AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> > I see you have modified it to use readline, which is great, but since
> > readline is GPLed, I think the complete Debian bibindex package should be
> > released under GPL, not only the modifications for Debian as stated in the
> > copyright file.
>
> Santiago is referring to a modification that I did to the biblook/bibindex
> package to include history support at the command line. This item was in
> the upstream ToDo list and an improved patch of mine has been incorporated
> upstream to appear in the next release.
>
> I am attaching below the copyright file for my package. At the time I
> created it, I did not pay attention to this problem of linking
> against a
> GPLéd (not LGPLéd) library. I am confused about what to do now. Although
> the upstream source is "public domain", I cannot release the whole package
> under the GPL, as it is actively maintained and the upstream authors may not
> appreciate it. Could the licensing gurus enlighten me here?
"public domain" means that you can publish it under the GPL.
This term means that the ones who are copyright owners do not enforce
it but have placed it into the public domain. Which basically means
that you can do anything with such a piece of software (even copyright
it by yourself and sell it under NDAs and such).
Releasing it under the GPL becomes an issue of politics (with regard
to the upstream maintainers).
Usual disclaimer: I am not a laywer, etc. No legal advice given. foo
bar.
Jens
---
Jens.Ritter@weh.rwth-aachen.de grimaldi@debian.org
Key ID: 2048/E451C639 Jens Ritter
Key fingerprint: 5F 3D 43 1E 24 1E CC 48 1E 05 93 3A A7 10 73 37
Reply to: