On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 06:47:34PM +0000, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> > > Roland Stigge wrote: > > > debian-legalint > > I don't think this is a good idea. > Me neither. A "virtual debian-legal" would be something that analyzed > licenses: Only if you assume a virtual foo does everything the regular foo does. "vrms" hasn't written any patches for emacs, afaik, eg. > $ debian-legalint COPYRIGHT.foo > COPYRIGHT.foo:33: warning: mentions specific protocol standard > COPYRIGHT.foo:57: talks about "best efforts" to contact upstream > COPYRIGHT.foo:64: US export control laws $ debian-legalint realplay Component: non-free Limitations: no-source non-debian no-redistribution single-computer-at-any-time backup-okay no-reverse-engineer non-commericial-use-only ... $ debian-legalint single-computer-at-any-time realplay ... Something like that would probably be both useful and feasible, and it's not particularly inappropriate to call it "legalint". (The "debian-" seems a bit gratuitous though) Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Australian DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review! -- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda
Attachment:
pgp9uaUBEXieV.pgp
Description: PGP signature