AW: Licesing question regarding a new package named isdn2h323
> > We do not *redistribute* isdn2h323 but we *distribute* it. This
> > paragraph is only interesting for programs like isdngw, which are
> > modified versions of isdn2h323.
> Debian redistributes it. We're not saying that you are doing anything
> illegal. We're saying that Debian hasn't gotten permission from you
> to redistribute isdn2h323.
I do not think that this is true.
> That is because you've given Debian a
> license that it can't comply with.
> Specifically, the additional notices are additional restrictions that
> you've added to the license.
Additional restrictions? We simply clarify how to read GPL's paragraph
about copyright notices.
> However, the GPL says that you can't add
> any more restrictions.
Sorry to say that, but this is nonsense. The GPL is only a *text*
document and not a person/company.
> If you just said that the code is offered under the GPL, then there
> would be no problem. If you said that it was under the GPL, but
> without clause 6 and with the additional notices, then it might not be
> a problem. But you've put Debian into a bind because it can't obey
> clause 6 and the additional notices at the same time.
I do not think that this correct.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org