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

Re: Advise about missing copyright info

(Please follow the Debian mailing list code of conduct. I didn't ask
for personal copies of messages also sent to the list.)

Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:

> * Ben Finney:
> > If not, this does appear to me to be a policy bug. Such a bug must
> > be fixed either by removing the package from Debian or by getting
> > a clear, correct statement of copyright for the work from the
> > copyright holder, and recording that in 'debian/copyright'.
> Usually, it's argued on this list

I'm presuming "this list" refers to debian-legal, as opposed to the
other list in this discussion.

> that a requirement for precise
> information on the copyright holder fails the Dissident Test.

I've not seen the Dissident test applied that way.

The Dissident test applies to whether the *recipient* of the work can
exercise their freedoms, including the freedom to modify and/or
redistribute, without being forced to personally identify themselves.

The *copyright holder* can't expect to remain anonymous and still be
identified as the copyright holder. (Copyright laws might nevertheless
assert that an anonymous entity can hold copyright, but that's beside
the point here.)

I don't see that the Dissident test applies to the copyright holder
(as opposed to recipients of the work), nor that it's non-free to
require the copyright holder to be personally identifiable.

> (SCNR)

Hopefully you also see the distinction as I do.

 \         "Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?" "I think so, |
  `\     Brain, but isn't a cucumber that small called a gherkin?"  -- |
_o__)                                            _Pinky and The Brain_ |
Ben Finney

Reply to: