On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:42:16 +0200 Jens Seidel wrote: > On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 01:13:18PM +0200, Pau Ruŀlan Ferragut wrote: > > Most of the links in http://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/ are broken, such as > > the FAQ itself. Please have a look at them. > > Most? > > OK, a few are indeed broken and I suggest to use the following URLs > instead. Since this is license stuff it would be nice if it could be > checked (just in case a license changed (such as X's one and the old > link referred to a older version than my new proposal, ...). > > MIT/X11-style licenses: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License Actually, the MIT_License wikipedia page currently includes the Expat/MIT license, not the X11/MIT license. I would suggest to use the following link: Expat/MIT license: http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt The so-called X11/MIT license uses a slightly different wording and also includes a clause forbidding unauthorized use of names in advertising. Unfortunately, I cannot find a currently valid URL for the X11/MIT license. The text is quoted in one of my old bug reports: http://bugs.debian.org/284340 If anyone finds a valid URL for the X11/MIT, I would be very interested to know... Please note that http://www.xfree86.org/3.3.6/COPYRIGHT2.html#3 is close, but not equal to the license I used to know as the X11 license -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/index.html#nanodocs The nano-document series is here! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpU4CF5qyeiO.pgp
Description: PGP signature