Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 05:35:51AM -0700, Walter Landry wrote: >> debian@martin-kittel.de wrote: >>> I have verfified that the actual sources for the generated HTML are >>> Microsoft Word documents and that those will not be >>> distributed. Does the mean that the maxdb-doc package will have to >>> be pulled from the repository? > >> Yes, unless you get a license exemption from the copyright holder >> allowing Debian and its mirrors to distribute the HTML as is. They >> will probably agree. In that case, it goes into non-free. > > It's not obvious to me that either the license exemption or the non-free > categorization are necessary here. GPL requires the "preferred form for > modification", which for most people working on derivative works would > probably *not* be the Word docs? As I understand it, "preferred form for modification" means the preferred form by a person who made modifications (in other words, upstream), not the preferred form of those who would like to make modifications (in other words, downstream). In any case, I'd sooner edit a Word document (using OO.o, Abiword, or similar) than the "HTML" that Word outputs. - Josh Triplett
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature