"Oliver M. Bolzer" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > I think we all remember the controversy around pornview's introduction > into Debian because of it's name. It's currently in the archieves but > there are reasons to believe pornview is infringing the copyright > (and open source ethics) of another image viewer also in our archives. > GImageView. > > Both softwares are GPL, the fact that Pornview uses a lot of GImageView's code > verbatim or with modifications per se is not a problem, but Pornview has > stripped the original copyright notices and also doing things > like s/GImageView//g from variable and function names. > > GImageView's author's diary pages lists some of the > suspicious files and changes (the page is in Japanese) > http://www.homa.ne.jp/~ashie/diary/?200212b&to=200212122#200212122 > > According to this diary, after being confronted, the author of pornview > stopped providing his development version and CVS access. > > We should pull pornview from the archives until a version is released > that adresses this issue, either by removing the problematic code or > until the proper copyright notices are restored. The pornview author has already made a new release that fixes the copyright violations and also notified me of this problem with the version currently in Debian. -- Curse my natural showmanship!
Description: PGP signature