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

Re: Aspell-en license Once again.

On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 04:36:09PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> So, given that we have:
>  - a good-faith effort to respect rights that may not even have existed
> at the time,
>  - no way of identifying additional authors besides those contacted by
> DEC,
>  - a significant burden of proof on the part of any claimant, given that
> said claimant did not respond at the time of DEC's inquiry in addition
> to the ease which alphabetized word lists may be generated,
>  - significant jurisdictional issues surrounding the applicability of
> the Database Directive to DEC, the upstream author, or Debian itself,
>  - a significant likelihood that we would be joined in legal liability
> by Hewlett-Packard, the current owners of DEC's assets and a friendly
> ally of both free software and the Debian project,
> I vote that we treat the copyright to this list the same way we treat
> patents generally: wait for someone to complain before pulling the
> list.  The situation is analogous; just as we cannot know which patents
> we currently infringe upon, given the volume of patents and the volume
> of code we distribute, so here we cannot know which copyrights we
> infringe upon, due to our disconnection from their original authors.
> At any rate, it seems unlikely to me that anyone will be able to hold us
> responsible for willful infringement given the circumstances surrounding
> any holder's disregard for his/her rights up to this point.

I second this.

Does anyone, particularly from the European Union, want to oppose it?

G. Branden Robinson                |      The National Security Agency is
Debian GNU/Linux                   |      working on the Fourth Amendment
branden@debian.org                 |      thing.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |      -- Phil Lago, Deputy XD, CIA

Attachment: pgp6a413l2JLr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: