Re: Free Art License
On Sun, Sep 12, 2004 at 11:36:06PM +0200, Ingo Ruhnke wrote:
> > (There's been a repeated conversation wrt. source distribution and the
> > DFSG: what should Debian require for things like images, fonts and
> > movie clips? There isn't a strong consensus, yet.)
>
> Why does Debian than distribute that stuff at all? Isn't the normal
> policy to play safe and not distribute stuff unless it is clear what
> is meant by the license?
You're mixing up "what does Debian (the DFSG) require" and "what does
the GPL" require.
There have been repeated conversations about what the DFSG requires.
However, while there's a lack of agreement on it, the worst case is that
we violate the SC, not copyright law--it's not something to scoff at, but
it doesn't put Debian in legal jeopardy.
There have also been discussions about what the GPL requires, but I don't
believe there's really much ambiguity. "Preferred form for modification"
is an extremely functional definition. Of course, if you know of any data
of any kind in Debian that's under the GPL and doesn't include source,
point it out.
--
Glenn Maynard
Reply to: