Re: New Adobe CMaps license free enough for Debian?
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> I believe that I quoted the _license_ part of a CMap source header,
> deliberately leaving out the _copyright_ and _disclaimer_ parts, ad I
> considered those irrelevant for the question at hand.
I think it's probably important to have the disclaimer because some
licensors have tried to slip licence restrictions or liabilities into
what they labelled as disclaimers; and it's useful to know the
copyright holder in case it's one of the few that insists on
particular interpretations of terms like "use".
It also makes it slightly easier to spot common-licenses and compare
with them with wdiff because they are included in debian whole.
Thanks for asking. I've nothing much to add to other comments on
the substantial question. ccing as originally requested.
Hope that helps,
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: