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

Re: complete clone of the debian website

Previously Joey Hess wrote:
> http://www.491.org/projets/api/

Nice. Time to write them a letter I guess. How about something like this:


We recently became aware of your website at http://www.491.org/projets/api/ .
Unfortunately your webpages are a copy of the Debian homepage
(http://www.debian.org) and clearly violates its license in a couple
of points:

* The usage of the Debian Open Use Logo (better known as the swirl) is not
  allowed by its license. Its license states:

	Copyright (c) 1999 Software in the Public Interest 
	This logo or a modified version may be used by anyone to refer to
	the Debian project, but does not indicate endorsement by the

  The API pages clearly do not refer to the Debian project, or even mention

* The Debian homepage is covered by the Open Publication License (OPL) as found
  on http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/. That license puts some requirements
  on modified versions of the copyrighted material. From section I:

	The Open Publication works may be reproduced and distributed in while
	or in part, in any medium physical or electronic, provided that the
	terms of this license are adhered to, and that this license or an
	incorporation of it by reference [...] is displayed in the

  The license of the API page as found on
  http://www.491.org/projets/api/license.html does not adhere to the terms
  of the OPL and thus violates the OPL.

  From section IV:

	All modified versions of documents covered by this license, including
	translations, anthologies, compilations and partial documents, must
	meet the following requirements:

	1. The modified version must be labeled as such.
	2. The person making the modification must be identified and the
	   modifications dated.
	3. Acknowledgement of the original author and published if applicable
	   must be retained according to the normal academic citation
	4. The location of the original must be identified.
	5. The original author's (or authors') name(s) may not be used to
	   assert or imply endorsement of the resulting document without the
	   author's (or authors') permission.

  The API pages do not meet any of those 5 requirements.

We request that you remove the API webpages until they are relicensed
and updated to resolve these problems.


I also feel this shows a slight problem in the OPL: I would like to see
IV.5 modified to also mention logos and trademarks of the author.


 / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience  \
| wichert@liacs.nl                    http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |

Attachment: pgpQksy8oJO3b.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: