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

Re: licensing confusion

On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 04:36:16PM -0500, Evan Prodromou scribbled:
> >>>>> "MH" == Marek Habersack <grendel@debian.org> writes:
>     MH> It's simple - how is it possible that most licenses
>     MH> used by free software are incompatible [1] with GPL and yet
>     MH> debian mixes them in many projects it distributes (like
>     MH> mozilla, php, apache to name the most prominent ones).  What
>     MH> are the rules to freely (as in freedom) use the other licenses
>     MH> which are incompatible with GPL and to remain compatible with
>     MH> GPL without being forced to use it in your own projects which
>     MH> you don't want to license under GPL/LGPL? Does one have to
>     MH> obtain some kind of exemption from any of the "sides"?
> How did you get an @debian.org address without knowing the answer to
> that question? Aren't you supposed to know and understand the Free
> Software Guidelines and principles of Free Software before getting
> your DD badge?
Excuse me? How is that relevant? And as for why - ask James Troup, he
accepted me as the DD.

>     http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines
> Putting two pieces of software in the same distribution does not make
> them licensed the same way. Each package in Debian has its own
> license. If GPL'd software contaminated other works just by being in
> the same distribution, it wouldn't pass guideline 9. But it explicitly
> doesn't. From the GPL:
>     "In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the
>     Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on
>     a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the
>     other work under the scope of this License."
> Sorry I'm talking down to you, but seriously: you should know
Oh, I'm used to dick wars here. And I will say it right away - your dick is

> this. It's possible, though, that I'm misinformed and missing your
> point. Are you perhaps saying that there are Debian custom derivatives
> of Mozilla, PHP, and Apache that actually incorporate GPL'd or LGPL'd
> software?
It was a reflection based on the quoted gnu.org site. It was also induced by
reading the Debian's mozilla copyright file which is vague in stating that
some files are (solely) licensed under NPL or MPL (which, if true, would
create a problem if GPL code was used from within those files). So, the mail
was written on the spur of the moment :)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: