Re: Macromedia flash and shockwave
On Tue, May 29, 2001 at 08:52:30PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> 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.
Plus non-free isn't part of Debian at all, though it's (usually) hosted on
Debian's servers and has to follow the same packaging rules. So it's logically
impossible to ask for special permission to put something IN Debian anyway. =)
> >Please CC me on your replies - getting an extra copy of replies to my messages
> >works well with my procmail filters.
Reply to: