Re: Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
Glenn Maynard <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 11:08:24PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> a) Remove the material concerned from the installation guide in woody
>> and sarge and get new versions uploaded to the archive. Apologise
>> profusely. Potentially still be sued.
> d) Add attribution to the installation guide in woody and sarge, and
> remove the material concerned from the archive for the next stable
Sure. That's fairly equivalent to (a).
> This seems like "If you remove my work from your current version, I'll
> sue you for your violation in the last version". I hope you can
> understand why I don't believe that arrangement is acceptable--it's
> no different than "if you don't give me $100, I'll sue you for your
> violation in the last version".
> I don't see (c) happening; if it is, then Karsten's complaint was
> unclear (which shouldn't be surprising, given its length). Karsten
> is asserting that a) is "doing the wrong thing", which is ridiculous.
(c) /is/ happening. Karsten asked for attribution in 2003. And (a) /is/
doing the wrong thing - fixing the situation now doesn't excuse us from
the guilt of having been violating his copyright for the past few years,
especially when it was pointed out to us some time ago. We've been
offered a reasonable way to settle the situation. Karsten's well within
his rights to bring legal action, but instead he hasn't even threatened
to put it on Slashdot.
Which bit of "We've been knowingly violating a license for over 2 years,
and so we're the bad guys" is unclear here?
Matthew Garrett | firstname.lastname@example.org