Re: Draft new DFSG - r1.4
John writes:
> It places a requirement on those who "base research on SWI-Prolog and
> publish on this research" that it does not place on others. I suspect
> that the authors really meant that they want credit when portions of
> their work are included in the publication. Why not try to convince them
> to clarify the license? Pehaps they would be willing to change the
> demand to a request, or to make it clear that they mean derived works.
IMHO a nice & respectful letter is in place to make SWI-Prolog clarify
their position. Just remember one thing: programmers in the academic
computing community have a *hard* time getting credit for their software.
So please let us (debian) be tolerant towards this kind of advertising
claims where the only real problem is the discrimination of other
academics!
Let's propose that they use something like
`Any published work that has used SWI-Prolog to obtain the published
results should include a clear notice that this was the case. Notice
that for distribution of derived works this is automatically the case
since the Copyright notices must be retained.'
Cheers,
Kristoffer [an SWI-Prolog user]
--
Kristoffer Høgsbro Rose, phd, prof.associé <http://www.ens-lyon.fr/~krisrose>
addr: LIP, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, 46 Allée d'Italie, F-69364 Lyon 7
phone: +33(0)4 7272 8642, fax +33(0)4 7272 8080 <Kristoffer.Rose@ENS-Lyon.FR>
pgp f-p: A4D3 5BD7 3EC5 7CA2 924E D21D 126B B8E0 <krisrose@{debian,tug}.org>
Reply to: