On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 04:01:28PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Sun, 04 May 2008 18:37:06 +0800 Wen-Yen Chuang wrote:
>
> [...]
> > Francesco Poli wrote:
> > > I would certainly recommend removing the logos.
> >
> > Thanks to Josselin, Joe, and Francesco.
>
> You're welcome.
>
> >
> > There is a way to skip those logos by modifying source code of
> > ScummVM. [1]
> > But I think it is not the correct way to avoid the license issue.
>
> I agree: it would *not* avoid shipping non-free images in the package,
> it would just make it more difficult to *realize* that this is being
> done! So it would just be stuffing dust under the carpet!
>
> >
> > As far as I know, currently there is no easy way to edit those game
> > data. So beneath-a-steel-sky, flight-of-the-amazon-queen, and
> > lure-of-the-temptress should be in non-free segment.
Lure of the Temptress, PC DOS version (C) Revolution Software Ltd 1992-
------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
1) You may distribute this game for free on any medium, provided this license
and all associated copyright notices and disclaimers are left intact.
2) You may charge a reasonable copying fee for this archive, and may distribute
it in aggregate as part of a larger & possibly commercial software distribution
(such as a Linux distribution or magazine coverdisk). You must provide proper
attribution and ensure this license and all associated copyright notices, and
disclaimers are left intact.
3) You may not charge a fee for the game itself. This includes reselling the
game as an individual item.
4) You may modify the game as you wish. You may also distribute modified
versions under the terms set forth in this license, but with the additional
requirement that the work is marked with a prominent notice which states that
it is a modified version.
5) All game content is (C) Revolution Software Ltd.
6) THE GAMEDATA IN THIS ARCHIVE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND WITHOUT ANY EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING AND NOT LIMITED TO ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTIBILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Anyway 2 and 3 in not DFSG ok. 2 because "reasonable copying fee" is not clear enough
and 3 since the DFSG #1 ("The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party
from selling...")
Cheers,
Gonéri
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature