Hi Joey and all others! On 2004-04-27 18:43 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > As written this seems to let us keep *any* non-free software in sarge, > even software that has a license prohibiting distribution, which is > surely too broad. Agreed. I see the error, the Proposal that will be announced soon by Jeoren and others will take care of this. Thanks for the hint. > We cannot just shove GPL violations under the rug either. This was not my intention. > If non-free firmwares in the linux kernel are not compatable with > the GPL, then we can't ship them. If we do, we could be sued by any > contributor to the linux kernel. We already do. With woody and with testing. I guess that the only legally clean solution to this would be to instantly switch off our FTP servers and revoke all burned CDs (and have the FSF sue Red Hat, SuSE & co for not doing it :-) ) > A judge might draw a distinction between unknowingly violating a license > vs violating it again after we're aware of the problem with an entire > new release that is advertised widely. Since we know that Woody violates the GPL, I doubt that we would be attested "unknowingly". Of course an official release of Sarge might aggravate the problem by number, but not in principle, wouldn't it? Maybe we should postpone this discussion until the other GR proposal is publicly announced. Thanks for your comments and have a nice day! Martin -- Martin Pitt Debian GNU/Linux Developer martin@piware.de mpitt@debian.org http://www.piware.de http://www.debian.org
Attachment:
pgpj4dpIKzOWt.pgp
Description: PGP signature