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

Re: Squeak in Debian?

"Lex Spoon" <lex@cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> > > BUT, we are only obligated to the extent the case deals with our own
> > > actions.  I do not see a problem with this.  That seems good and proper
> > > to stand up for our own actions.  The clause does *NOT* make us liable
> > > for all legal attacks on Apple regarding Squeak.
> > 
> > J. Random CD distributor on Battlestar Galactica distributes a copy of
> > Squeak to his fellow argonauts.  The Silons sue Apple for contributory
> > copyright infringement, citing the distribution by J. Random.  Now
> > J. Random is obligated to defend Apple in US court, even though
> > J. Random doesn't even know where Earth is.
> > 
> J. Random CD distributor is irrelevant to this discussion.  Squeak would
> be in non-free, where it's user beware and distributor beware.

Ah, I thought you were still contesting the main/non-free distinction.
In any case, non-free is not entirely distributor beware.  CD
manufacturers have to be careful, but mirrors do not.  I don't believe
that any other license in non-free has this kind of clause, though I'm
open to being proven wrong.

> > > I do not understand your issue about locality.  The business in question
> > > is us, Debian.  We already have a distribution server at Berkeley, so we
> > > already need to evaluate and comply with the laws of northern
> > > California.
> > 
> > The CD distributors are not part of SPI, the non-profit that holds
> > title to the vast resources of Debian.  In addition, the Debian
> > mirrors only look at local law when evaluating whether to mirror
> > Debian.  They don't look up Northern California law.
> The individual CD distributors should not be automatically distributing
> non-free stuff.  Thus I still do not see the issue.
> It seems like our non-free infrastructure already needs to obey US
> export law, so I do not see the issue with us meeting that license
> condition.

non-free is not part of the bxa notification scheme, because the bxa
notifications is only available for certain type of software of which
main is a subset.  So there are still packages in non-us/non-free.

Walter Landry

Reply to: