Re: Copyright violation in utils/bsdiff 4.2-1
Scripsit Colin Percival <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> The text from my website appears as part of bsdiff_4.2-1.diff.gz.
> My website, as an original creative work, is covered by copyright
> laws and treaties. I did not give permission for my website to be
> copied and redistributed.
Have your spoken to the maintainer of the Debian package (Daniel
Baumann) about your problem? The canonical way to do this would be to
file a bug report (of severity 'serious') against bsdiff in the Debian
bug tracking system.
Debian's default procedure is to leave it to the package maintainer to
deal with issues with individual packages, unless and until it becomes
apparent that this will not lead to a resolution. It will probably
work a lot smoother if you deal directly with the maintainer.
If you were to insist on only communicating through our mailing lists,
somebody would probably volunteer to pass on your request to the
maintainer. But would really be best if you sort it out with him
directly. The facts that I can see do not indicate that he meant any
harm (he was probably assuming that the discription of the program
were implicitly covered by the license of the program itself), or that
he would object to removing the README file if approached politely.
Please also understand that the stated purpose of debian-legal is to
be a forum for internal debate about whether pieces of software come
with enough rights that we want them included in Debian. The list or
its participants have no particular power within the project, and it
is not meant to be a interface between the project at large and
parties in legal disputes.
Henning Makholm "We can hope that this serious deficiency will be
remedied in the final version of BibTeX, 1.0, which is
expected to appear when the LaTeX 3.0 development is completed."