[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Copyright question

On 1 Jun 1997, John Goerzen wrote:

> Christian Schwarz <schwarz@monet.m.isar.de> writes:
> > On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, joost witteveen wrote:
> > 
> > > Non-free it is
> > 
> > No. If the author forbids distribution a changed (i.e. bug fixed)
> > _binary_ version, I think the package may not even go into non-free. 
> > 
> > What do the others think?
> Before we go off half-cocked here:
>  1) I have e-mailed the author asking for permission to distribute
>     a bug-fixed software
>  2) We are distributing various programs without source already.  
>     These programs are not fixable.  (Example: xforms)  
> I really don't think that we should make lack of modification
> permission to be a reason to not include in non-free (after all, isn't
> this what non-free is for?)

Not exactly. non-free is not the place for doing illegal things :-) It
just the distribution used for programs which have some restrictions on
commercial distribution. Even the programs in non-free will have to comply
with a few rules, as for example, we must be allowed to ship a modified
binary. (Note, that this is something different from programs where no
source is available but we are allowed to modify, i.e. hack, the binary.)



--                 Christian Schwarz
                    schwarz@monet.m.isar.de, schwarz@schwarz-online.com,
Don't know Perl?     schwarz@debian.org, schwarz@mathematik.tu-muenchen.de
Visit                  PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7  34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA
http://www.perl.com     http://fatman.mathematik.tu-muenchen.de/~schwarz/

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: