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

Re: Tremulous packages

On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:55:08 -0400 Joe Smith wrote:

> "Francesco Poli" <frx@firenze.linux.it> wrote in message 
> 20060427230958.053df4db.frx@firenze.linux.it">news:20060427230958.053df4db.frx@firenze.linux.it...
> >>
> >>
> >> A simple clarification from the copyright holders that they will
> >not > be  enforcing any of the problematic
> >> clauses, along with the promise to upgrade to the newer versions of
> >CC > when  possible should qualify them
> >> as free. (We let Mozilla get away with this durring the
> >> tre-licencing). So  simply get the clarification.
> >
> >I don't see any similarities with the Mozilla case: Mozilla has been
> >going through a slow and difficult relicensing process from a
> >non-free status to a DFSG-free one.
> >Debian waited until the process ended.
> I'm pretty sure Debian did not wait until the process ended.
> If it had, Firefox would have only entered Debian around a month ago.

Sorry for not being clear enough: what I meant was "Debian hasn't moved
Mozilla-* packages to non-free and waited instead until the process
I hope this clarifies.

> The similaries may be somewhat limited, but the underlying idea is the
> same: some or all of the work is under a licence that is not free, but
> upstream  has assured us that they
> are trying to change the licence of the work to one that is free, and
> has  assured us that they do not
> intend to hold the non-free terms against us before the process has
> been  complete.
> The only real difference is that is this case, we cannot be 100% sure
> that  the new licences will be
> DFSG-free.

I think it's quite a significant difference!

> However, correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the
> impression  that CC has
> acknowleged the various problems this list has found, and intends to
> correct  them.

I'm not aware of any promise from CreativeCommons to fix their licenses.
I know that they are cooperating with a Debian workgroup, but the final
results of this collaboration (that is to say, 3.0 licenses) are still
to be disclosed to the public...

> So it is more similar than it may appear.

Sorry, but I'm not convinced...

    :-(   This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS?   ;-)
  Francesco Poli                             GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpb4B7KF6y5U.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: