Re: Spice copyright

[Syrus Nemat-Nasser <syrus@ucsd.edu>]

On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, Jim Pick wrote:

> > Philippe Troin <phil@fifi.org> writes:
> > 
> > >     1. The licensee agrees not to charge for the University of
> > > California code itself.
> > 
> > > It then seems to me that spice can be packaged in Debian main 
> > > distribution.
> > 
> > No, it has to go in non-free because of the above clause.
> > 
> > 
> > Guy
> 
> But if you read it in context, it says:
> 
>     1. The licensee agrees not to charge for the University of California
>        code itself. The licensee may, however, charge for additions,
>        extensions, or support.
> 
> So if we modify it - then it can go into the main distribution, since 
> somebody who is charging for our version could conceivably be charging for 
> our modification.
> 
> Aren't we modifying something when we package it?

I think it has to go in non-free because of the spirit of the above
clause, and also, because the "licensee" must sign an agreement prior to
download and distribution.  Or, did I misread that part?

Syrus.

-- 

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Syrus Nemat-Nasser <syrus@ucsd.edu>    UCSD Physics Dept.



--
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 .