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

Re: Anti-TPM clauses

Olive <olive001@tele2allin.be> writes:

> Francesco Poli wrote:
> > Firstoff, please note that *packages* are accepted in main or
> > otherwise rejected.  *Packages*, not *licenses*.
> OK, but packages are accepted according to their license; when I say
> that Debian accept a license I mean that it accept packages under
> this license. This seems clear, is it not?

It's not, because it gives the incorrect implication that *all* works
under that license are acceptable for Debian by definition.

We must consider *all* aspects that may restrict the freedom of a
recipient of a work, of which the set of license terms is the most
significant but not always the only factor.

> I must confess you that the answer having me really angry might not
> be your. I was particularly angry by reading a message like this:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/09/msg00119.html
> where he seems to say that a consensus of Debian legal might have
> more value that the one expressed by the people officially entitled
> to do so.

There was no value judgement in that message. I'm sorry you found one
where it wasn't written. Here it is again:

Ben Finney wrote:
> Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> writes:

> > debian2007@macfreek.nl wrote:
> > >There seem to be consensus that as long as there is no vote on
> > >[CC by-sa 3.0], it's probably non-free, and best not put it in
> > >main. Correct?

> > Wrong. CC-BY-SA 3.0 is a free license and many works licensed this
> > way are in main.

> Note that the latter does not necessarily imply the former. Many
> packages have been in main against the advice of a consensus view on
> debian-legal that the package is non-free.

The original poster *directly asked* about the consensus view. My
response was a clarification about consensus of debian-legal, since
that was the original question.

> That really let think that debian-legal would be entitled to decide
> what is free according to Debian.

Not at all. This list is a Debian resource to allow discussion of
DFSG-freeness of works, so that decisions can hopefully be informed by
more than one opinion. It has no special power in that regard.

 \            "Program testing can be a very effective way to show the |
  `\        presence of bugs, but is hopelessly inadequate for showing |
_o__)                              their absence."  -- Edsger Dijkstra |
Ben Finney

Reply to: