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

Re: Re: RE : Re: Linux Magazin Germany, affecting Debian's image?!


The aspect of all this focused on Debian trademark protection is for the wonderful folks who own the trademark to consider.  I think one point was that ‘business’ minded folks will probably make some judgments on use of Debian based on your protection of the trademark, and implied int hat the quality / reliability of the product.  But again not what I wanted to comment on


I like the distribution requirement discussion.  Goswin is pretty close to being right on. Thanks!!


I assume the ‘package’ on the DVD is licensed with GPL


As I understand it, and I’ve worked directly with FSF on this one, here are the  basic points:


--If the source is provided on the DVD then that’s it!!  No further obligation to provide to anyone else via any other mechanism!


--If the source is not in the distribution, in this case on the DVD, then there must be an ‘offer’ for source.

--All offers must be ‘public’ – meaning redeemable by anyone, anytime (for 3 years)


(no distribution has to be $ free or by the specific mechanism of download)



So looking at some comments made:


>>If any third party *knows* about the existence of such an offer -- perhaps because they know that Company A licensed some software to

Company B under the GPL -- could they cite its existence and thereby claim their right to a "machine-readable copy?"


Yes – all offers must be public


>> You're only required to provide the source to those who received a written promise from you or anyone who passed on the written promise.

The GPL does not say that you may not require proof of them having received the written promise.


Not true all offers must be public.


>> The point is that there is nothing wrong with the mere fact that you cannot download a specific DVD image. After

all, there's nothing wrong with putting the source packages _on_ that image...


Absolutely correct, if source is in the distribution then that fulfills the GPL obligation for source


>> It is not ok to distribute binary images and say: You want source? Ask Debian for it. That is what I ment with distributing only binary

images. Debian does not give a written offer under 3b to be passed on by distributers under 3c.


For the most part correct.  There are circumstances that I can say ‘go get it from debian’ – if I have an agreement with debian to provide such fulfillment for the 3 years. 

I cannot point to another source if I have no control (agreement) with that source.






Reply to: