Re: Macromedia flash and shockwave
On Tue, 29 May 2001, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
>On Tue, May 29, 2001 at 05:19:08PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
>> Actually, the installer would go into contrib, unless you're planning to
>> use a non-DFSG-free license for the installer itself. The program itself
>> is DFSG free, it just depends on (gets) a non-free program.
>>
>> >If not, we could ask Macromedia for an exceptional permission. Does
>> >anyone know how such a permission should be asked? (Maybe an e-mail
>> >template...)
>>
>> NO! The email template for asking debian specific permission is DON'T DO
>> IT. I cannot emphasize it strongly enough: Debian neither will nor even
>> can ask for debian-specific permission, see DFSG #8:
>
>First let me mention that I am not a lawyer. That said, I don't see why DFSG
I don't think that there's anyone that posts on this list regularly that's
a laiwyer... Hell, the only Bar I'm a member of is the one on
the corner that knows my favorite brands of beer, gin, and vodka...
>#8 should affect programs in non-free. I am not taking a position on the
>main topic of this thread, but why would any rules of the DFSG apply to
>non-free? I thought that was the whole point of that (separate) distribution.
>Is there some reason other than the DFSG why a Debian-specific license could
>not be used to put something in non-free?
This is true, the DFSG has no say on things that fail it in even one
respect. However, DFSG 8 may apply to the ACTION of asking. That is,
nobody representing Debian may ask another to circumvent the DFSG.
>Please CC me on your replies - getting an extra copy of replies to my messages
>works well with my procmail filters.
>
>- Jimmy Kaplowitz
>jimmy@debian.org
>
>
>
--
There is an old saying that if a million monkeys typed on a million
keyboards for a million years, eventually all the works of Shakespeare
would be produced. Now, thanks to Usenet, we know this is not true.
Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who!
Reply to: