Bug #23105 says that there is a DFSG-free copyright for rsynth in its
README file, but, from looking through a recent 'apt-get source rsynth',
this seems to be only *almost* true.
At the top of the README file, there is the following statement:
This is a text to speech system produced by integrating various pieces
of code and tables of data, which are all (I believe) in the public domain.
The bulk of the intergration was done by myself, that is Nick Ing-Simmons.
I can be reached via my employer at email@example.com.
However, the source package contains the following, in text710.doc:
I am making the file available to others, via the Oxford Text
Archive, so that researchers who need a reasonably large
computer-usable dictionary do not need to spend months, as I did,
putting one together. Anyone contemplating commercial use of the file
should contact the Oxford University Press.
This looks like it's going to fail DFSG #6, or at least DFSG #8.
text710.doc isn't included in the binary package, as far as I can tell,
but of course Debian diffs can't remove files.
How should this be resolved? It looks on the verge of DFSG-freeness, and
leaving it in non-free would be a shame. Perhaps a native source package
could be prepared that didn't contain this non-free file. Or perhaps the
source package could stay in non-free and the binary go into contrib
(though that seems a bit silly). Either way round, the debian/copyright
file needs to have a real copyright statement in it or else the package
can't be distributed at all; I'd suggest just copying the two short
paragraphs from the README above.
I've cc'd this to debian-legal for their opinions.
Colin Watson [firstname.lastname@example.org]