Re: Re: InaTux's "Author's Choice of Terminology License"

["oohay moc." <loopy_bajj@yahoo.com>]

Did you read the license?

The majority of the software in Debian is licensed under the GPL, that is why Debian is referred to as licensed under the GNU GPL.

I would think the license would be applied to the act of final distribution of Debian, to the source LiveCD, or other ways. So that when one receives the operating system they have to follow the same terminology in modifications.

The license aims to ensure the that operating systems be called "GNU/Linux" in any derivative works, like Ubuntu. It also aims to ensure that any software licensed under it has to be call "Free Software." But, one could use the license to ensure that the OS be call "Linux" and the software be called "Open Source." That is my paraphrased summary of the ACT License.

I didn't write the license so I don't fully understand myself. The only information I have is the link to the license at inatux.com that I already posted.

--- On Sun, 6/7/09, Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au> wrote:

From: Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au>
Subject: Re: InaTux's "Author's Choice of Terminology License"
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Cc: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
Date: Sunday, June 7, 2009, 2:34 AM

"oohay moc." <loopy_bajj@yahoo.com> writes:

> So! I was wondering what the community at large, and hopefully the
> main Debian developers, think about InaTux's "Author's Choice of
> Terminology License"? You can find it here:
> http://www.inatux.com/actl/

It's much more practical to look at how *works* are licensed, since
often the details of the license are best considered in light of the
specific work.

What specific existing works is this license currently applied to? What
specific works is it proposed for application to?

> It has been discontinued, but, I am wondering if the community and the
> Debian developers would think about licensing the Debian operating
> system under such a license?

There is no single license for the Debian operating system. It is
distributed under the combined terms of all its thousands of component
parts. The copyright license terms for each part should be documented in
‘/usr/share/doc/$PACKAGENAME/copyright’.

If you want to discuss further in the context of specific works, I
suggest you take it to the ‘debian-legal’ list (Cc set). If you *don't*
want to discuss in the context of specific works, I'm not understanding
what the point is.

> I know it conflicts with the GNU GPL, but putting that aside.

It only conflicts with the GNU GPL if one attempts to apply its terms
simultaneously with the GPL to the same work.

> I have sent an email to Richard Stallman asking a similar question, no
> response.

What is it you are hoping to get from such a conversation, either with
Richard Stallman or with the Debian project? I'm having difficulty
seeing what the subject is.

--
\     “I must say that I find television very educational. The minute |
  `\       somebody turns it on, I go to the library and read a book.” |
_o__)                                                    —Groucho Marx |
Ben Finney


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org