Re: Bug#12541: package to be moved to non-free

[Erik Andersen <andersee@debian.org>]

On Mon, Sep 29, 1997 at 05:39:52PM +0200, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> 
> Hi folks!
> 
> According to my request, Guy has moved a few packages from "contrib" into
> "non-free" because the licenses do not comply with the DFSG.
> 
[-----------stuff snipped---------------]
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> On 27 Sep 1997, Guy Maor wrote:
> 
> > Christian Schwarz <schwarz@monet.m.isar.de> writes:
> > 
> > > package                       reason
> > > ============================= ==================================
> > > nedit-[ds]motif               commercial distrib not allowed


I just sent the following email to the author of Nedit. With luck,
we _might_ get the license changed...  Cross fingers, knock on wood,
or do whatever your culture prescribes for getting good luck.

 -Erik


From: Erik Andersen <andersee>
To: Mark Edel <edel@FNAL.GOV>
Subject: Re: NEdit 5.0 Beta Test Version Ready

On Fri, Sep 26, 1997 at 10:39:00AM -0500, Mark Edel wrote:
> Thanks to everyone who helped with the alpha test.  A very stable beta
> test version is now available in:
> 
>     ftp://ftp.fnal.gov/pub/nedit/beta_test_5_0/
> 
[--------------description snipped------------------]
> -- Mark Edel

Hi Mark,

I am currently maintaining Nedit for Debian/GNU Linux (actually, I originally 
packaged it up as a .deb package around a year ago).  I don't know if you are 
familiar with Debian/GNU Linux, but we are committed to keeping our Linux 
distribution entirely free software.  About two months ago, we developed a set
of guidelines to help us maintain the high quality of our softare distribution. 
Unfortunatly, the license for Nedit doesn't meet our Free Software Guidelines,
and so Nedit can no longer be included in our Distribution.
(See: http://www.debian.org/social_contract.html#guidelines 
for complete details on our Free Software Guidelines)

For Nedit, the only provision of the license which is in conflict with
our Free Software Guidelines is the following:

o   Any distribution of the software available from this server shall be
    at no charge.  To obtain a license to commercialize any of the software
    programs available from this server, contact FNAL's Office of Research
    and Technology Applications, P.O. Box 500, MS-200, Batavia, IL 60510-0500.

This provision ensures that nedit can not become part of our main distribution.

We would like to include Nedit in our main distribution, because it is a 
really great editor. Unfortunatly, since Debian/GNU Linux is copied and 
distributed by commercial institutions who charge for their services and make 
a (small) profit, Nedit's license prevents it from being included in Debian.   

I can understand the motivation behind this provision, because on the surface
this appears to ensure that nedit is freely available to everyone.  In 
practice, however, the "no charge" clause ensures that nedit can _never_ 
become a part of a operating system such as Debian/GNU Linux (or RedHat Linux, 
Solaris, HP-UX, etc...) because it cannot be distributed by those wishing to
make a profit.  The key here is that those distributing software do so because
they provide a service.  They are operating in a free market, and if they
charge a price that the market will not bear, they will not succeed.  With
Debian/GNU Linux, the source code as well as binaries are included in our 
distribution.  If someone wishes to download the source and/or binaries
for a package, instead of buying media from a distributor, they are free to 
do so.  Currently, there are several companies that sell our 2 CD Official 
distribution for about $4.00 U.S, which is often less expensive then 
downloading it from the internet.  Clearly this is a very conveinient service 
for people with slow internet connections.  If someone was to charge $10000 
for our distribution (which they are free to do, BTW), nobody would buy it 
because they could download it for much less.  

I wonder if it would be possible for you to modify the Nedit license so
that we could include it in the Debian distribution?  You could do this 
by changing the "no charge" clause to something like the following (which is 
a modified verision of the "Artistic" License which applies to Perl):

	You may charge a Reasonable copying fee for any distribution 
	containing Nedit, but you may not charge a fee for Nedit itself.  
	You may distribute Nedit in aggregate with other (possibly 
	commercial) programs as part of a larger (possibly commercial) 
	software distribution provided that you do not advertise Nedit 
	as being your own product.

        A "Reasonable copying fee" is whatever you can justify on the
        basis of media cost, duplication charges, time of people involved,
        and so on.  (You will not be required to justify it to the
        Copyright Holder, but only to the computing community at large
        since that is the market which must bear the fee.)

Thank you for your time, and thank you for Nedit, which is a _great_ editor. 
I do hope we can work comething out.  It would be a shame for Debian to
miss out on Nedit because of something so small.

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen   Web:    http://www.inconnect.com/~andersen/ 
                   email:  andersee@debian.org
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--


--
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 .