Re: Non-free files in source packages?

[Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com>]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

>> Alternatively, you could try asking the relevant people if they'd grant
>> a more permissive license for the data table, in order to encourage the
>> wide and correct use of the standard surrounding it.
>
> That is a good suggestion.
>
> I have mailed the RFC authors now.  I'm not convinced they are the
> only copyright holders, but it could be a step in the right direction.

FYI, one of the authors replied and claimed he couldn't agree to any
license change, neither to make more permissive or more restrictive,
because ISOC owned the copyright.

So it seems that for libidn, my best bet seem to be that the tables
are not copyrightable, or that the IETF change their license.  For the
time being, I'm going with the first option (because that is what
licensing@gnu.org told me).  I can't tell if that is good enough for
Debian, though.

For other packages that incorporate non-trivial parts from RFCs, the
situation is worse, and it seems changing the IETF license is the only
solution.

Again, having Debian let the IETF know about its position on this
would be useful.

Thanks,
Simon