On 2004-06-03 02:19:55 +0100 Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu> wrote:
If they really meant to "steal" the work, then the whole license may be invalid. In which case, Debian has no permission to distribute at all. So I think a clarification is definitely in order.
Why? What form should such a clarification request take? "Are you a gibbering fool who interprets the licence in an obscure, counter-intuitive, absurd manner that is impossible in any jurisdiction we've heard about yet?" seems the appropriate form to me, but is hardly diplomatic.
We should seek this clarification from all holders of copyrights affecting debian. Any of them might interpret their licence in an invalid way by redefining the words.
Seriously, was there ever been a successful claim of copyright assignment on the basis of one of these clauses?
-- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know. http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing Help hack the EuroParl! http://mjr.towers.org.uk/proj/eurovote/