Re: Bug#386406: libmms: majormms haven't yet granted relicensing to LGPL
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006, Anon Sricharoenchai wrote:
> If there's one upstream that extract and modify dll files from Windows Media
> Player and relicense those dll to some freeware license, then this upstream software
> can be packaged into Debian/non-free? Although it is apparently that Microsoft
> doesn't give any privilege for them to relicense?
I think you want the obvious answer: no. And in this case, we would
likely question: "where do the DLL come from" (where's the code); but
you're taking a not too good example since: 1) it involves non-free 2)
it involves binary only code. In libmms, we're talking about source
code which has a public history, and we're shipping it in main.
> If Debian redistribute this package in freeware license, Debian will risk to
> get sued by Microsoft?
Yes.
> Or Debian can claim that, hey, it's not our responsibility, we got the valid
> license from the upstream author, if you (Microsoft) get loss, you should sue
> the upstream author to get compensate for all of the loss resulted by such
> relicensing?
We can always argue that we did a mistake, and try our best to repair
it.
> > > Can debian relicense this package back to GPL to avoid this conflict?
> > Sure, as soon as this is proven to be LGPL or not LGPL one way or the
> > other, I will act accordingly.
> According to Section 3 of LGPL, Debian or anyone can relicense LGPL software
> into the ordinary GPL. Debian can decide to relicense this libmms to GPL to
> avoid licensing problem with the original author of majormms, until the
> upstream author of libmms have cleared the problem about their license. This
> is just an interim solution.
First, I won't relicense any application that is currently LGPL as GPL
in Debian only following the claim of someone that wants me to do so.
I think we should follow the upstream license whenever possible.
Beside, some stacks (such as GStreamer) benefit from the fact that this
is LGPL and *not* GPL.
So, no, I don't intend to just relicense it as GPL if this is not
required.
Bye,
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
Reply to: