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

Re: Why we must ship at least some licenses (was: Manoj, ...



Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:

 Marcus> Hello,

 Marcus> On Sun, Aug 16, 1998 at 05:30:47PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
 
 Marcus> I quote the GPL for you:

 Marcus> "  1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
 Marcus>  source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
 Marcus>  conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
 Marcus>  copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
 Marcus>  notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
 Marcus>  and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License
 Marcus>  along with the Program."

 Marcus> [Note the last sentence. This applies to source code only, but later:]

	Note that there is no requirement to give the copyright in the
 same tar file, or the same .deb file, or even bundled in together.

	We are required to give the copyright to them. And give we
 shall. It is right out there in /usr/doc/copyright/. If that is not
 good enough, it is there in the base-files package.

	Still not good enough? I shall make it a personal goal to
 ensure that the verbatim section carries copies of all popular
 licenses, so they are available to people who download single
 packages.

 Marcus> We can only enforce it if we ship the license with the
 Marcus> package. If you want to be clever about this, I'll not follow
 Marcus> you, as I think this is not only asking for legal problems
 Marcus> but also bad for the reputation of Debian.

 Marcus> It was not agreed upon the question if the verbatim section
 Marcus> should be an integrated part of Debian at all. There have
 Marcus> been people supporting it and people who didn't think it
 Marcus> should be (beside me and you).
 
 >> Books are copyrighted too. What was the last tiem you say a
 >> license on a paperback?

 Marcus> According to my dictionary, a paperbook is a "book with a
 Marcus> thin cardboard cover". I don't see what this has to do with
 Marcus> the current topic, but I have seen quite a few paperbacks
 Marcus> with a copyright inside.

	It says copyright such and such, all rights reserved. No
 license under which the book reaches your hands.
 
 >> We distribute the licese as a courtesy. And even that is
 >> satisfied as long as the license exists on the system

 Marcus> I don't think so. From the BSD:

 Marcus> "2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
 Marcus>    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
 Marcus>    documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution."

	We do that. It is in the distribution. We follow the letter of
 the law.

 >> 
 >> Saying I create mischief? That my views on laws are
 >> disgusting? 

 Marcus> This is my personal opinion, basing on what you said

	I don't give a damn if you are calling me names based on your
 own darned opinion. Name calling is na,e calling. 

 Marcus> about (not) shipping copyrights along the software. At least
 Marcus> the licenses "GPL", "LPGL" and "BSD" require us to ship the
 Marcus> license with the software.

	And we do not have to ship them in the same .deb file. You
 made that requirement up. Stick to the facts, please.
	
	We ship the licenses in the distribtuiotn. The licenses are
 available on every debian system The licenses are on all our
 archives. The law is not being broken, despite your claims to the
 contrary. 


 >> >> And I say we should not have the exception even for copyright
 >> >> documents. They should be in the verbatim section, on another CD, but
 >> >> in an required package, and with all indications that they are an
 >> >> integral part of Debian.
 >> 
 >> Integral part of debian. 

 Marcus> This doesn't work. The license has to come with the software
 Marcus> (maybe not for all licenses, but at least for the GPL, LGPL
 Marcus> and the BSD).

	Wrong again, Marcus. Wrong again. You really should read what
 the document says, not what you want it to say.


 Marcus> Even assuming this would not be true I'd still object making
 Marcus> the verbatim section an integral part of Debian just to put
 Marcus> the copyright licenses there.

	Objections with no grounds are useless. 

 Marcus> Debian does ship source packages and binary packages,
 Marcus> too. Everyone can download a binary package, and will not get
 Marcus> the copyright. This is a misconception.
 >> 
 >> So what? No law reqiores that the copyright is bundled in. And
 >> /usr/doc/package/copyright should trell them where they can
 >> get it from.

 Marcus> The copyright itself requires it, at least the GPL, LGPL and
 Marcus> the BSD.  The Artistic license does not seem to make it a
 Marcus> requirement, and I didn't checked other licenses.

	Incorect. The recipeient merely has to be given the
 licenses. We do give every Debian user the licenses, and we make the
 license available to everyone else, whether or not they download our
 software.

 Marcus> The "verbatim" section was not about the copyrights of the
 Marcus> software we ship, but was about other immutable
 Marcus> documents. You choose to extend the discussion to copyrights
 Marcus> as well, and so far I have not heard any voice supporting you
 Marcus> in this opinion.
 >> 
 >> And I have heard none supporting you either.

 Marcus> Sure. Well, I'm not going into "body-count" here, the
 Marcus> participation in the discussion was not high enough to
 Marcus> measure the opinion of the majority.

	What majority? Jules is the only one presenting a reasonably
 balanced summary. And look at what he says. There have been no other
 participants for the last dozen or so rounds. 

 >> >> I shall leave the debian-devel list alone, and uninvolved in
 >> >> this debate after this message. Read the archives of debian-policy if
 >> >> you are interested in this issue.
 >> 
 Marcus> This is a very serious issue. A copyright is not the funny
 Marcus> little text you ignore anyway. It is the only thing that
 Marcus> grants our rights.
 >> 
 >> You keep repeating that non-sequitor. Do you really understand
 >> what we are talking about? Yes, the copyright is what gives us teh
 >> right to distribute. It, however, does not need be bundled in with
 >> every piece of software that is covered by it.

 Marcus> Actually, yes I know what we are talking about. And it seems
 Marcus> that I read the copyrights more carefully than you. The GPL,
 Marcus> LGPL and BSD license make it a requirement to ship the
 Marcus> license with the source and the executable.  I didn't checked
 Marcus> other, not so common copyrights.
 
	No, you don't. You extrapolate what you want them to
 say. Never does anyone require things be in the same .deb file, or
 the same.tar file. They say same distribution, at best, and we do
 that. Every single Debian system has the licenses.

	You wish we are in violation, but we are not.

 >> Alrteady we guarantee that /usr/doc/sopyright/* exist on every
 >> Debian system. That goes above and beyond the call of law.

 Marcus> This is not enough, I'm afraid. We are not only distributing
 Marcus> complete systems. We are also distributing single packages.

	Semantically, that is debatable. You may download single a
 package,but if you report a bug with none of the other packages
 present, you shall be told that without the Debian system, the
 package alone is not supported. 

	We do not support a machine that does not have the essential
 packages. 

	So, we also shall provide the licenses unbundled in the
 verbatim section.

	manoj
-- 
 How much net work could a network work, if a network could net work?
Manoj Srivastava  <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E


Reply to: