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

Re: Non-free, Contrib and CDs (Was Re: GNU Win32? Not anymore.)




On Wed, 16 Jul 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:

> Date: Wed, 16 Jul 97 09:56 PDT
> From: Bruce Perens <bruce@pixar.com>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, Bill Mitchell <mitchell@mozcom.com>
> Subject: Re: Non-free, Contrib and CDs (Was Re: GNU Win32? Not anymore.)
> 
> From: Bill Mitchell <mitchell@mozcom.com>
> >   Name             CD?    Criteria
> >   ----             ---    --------
> >   Main             Yes    Mainline Debian distribution
> >                           Social Contract compatible
> >   No-Export        No     US Export Restricted
> >   No-Profit        No     Cannot be sold for profit
> >   No-Sell          No     Cannot be sold, even for cost
> >   Use-Restricted   Yes    Usage is restricted
> >                           but can be sold for profit
> >   Installers       Yes    Installers
> >   Depends-Problem  Yes?   Depends on package in No-* areas
> 
> The problem is that this puts us in the position of interpreting licenses
> for the CD-ROM manufacturers. I would much prefer they read the licenses in
> non-free and decide what they can include, rather than us doing it for them.
> There's an element of legal risk involved.

It seems to me that we're doing some interpretation of licenses in
any case, to decide what should go in the "non-free" area and what
should not.

My concern centers more around the "non-free" name than anywhere else.
As I understand it from the Debian Policy Manual, "non-free" means,
in this usage, something like "not freely redistributable".  However,
more and more, I see the term "non-free" being used in the sense
of not being "Free Software" in the sense of the Debian Free
Software Guidelines.  In fact, the Debian Social Contract itself
seems to use the term "non-free" in both senses in paragraph 5.

I think the categories above essentially break the current "non-free"
area ("non-free" as defined in the Debian Policy Manual, that is),
up into two areas:  No-Profit and No-Sell.  How about lumping them
back together again, and renaming them something like 
"Restricted-Distribution", to avoid the confusion over the two
different usages of the term "non-free"?




--
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: