(-devel dropped) On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 11:25:13AM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > A few possible problems are: > - The promise was made without consideration (no symbolic one cent payment) That's not true; they received assistance from Debian developers including myself on reviewing the license's suitability, packaging assistance, and in preparing their press release, all of which was provided after Sun had indicated they were trying to prepare a license that would allow Debian to distribute Java in non-free, and with the aim of making that possible. > - The promise was not formally notarised. A press notice may not count. There are plenty of mail logs that can be provided as evidence as well, should we need it. If there's a particular statement that people think would be helpful, we could probably arrange to get that notarised (though obviously "We hereby license Java under the GPL" will take more than a little time). > - It wouldn't damage Debian or anybody much to revoke the statement. If that's the case, there's no problem -- if Sun decide they'd like us to remove Java from non-free, they don't have to do anything beyond ask, and if they want it removed from non-free for stable, wait a month or two until the next point release is due. > Thie simplest solution in this case would be if Sun simply attached > the FAQ as an addendum to the licence rather than stating it's not > legally binding. (Obviously, they've now done something like this as well) Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature