Re: Bug#666010: ITP: nvidia-texture-tools -- image processing and texture manipulation tools
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 02:32:06AM -0700, Walter Landry wrote:
> I am Cc'ing the DPL for clarification.
[ then please do so at leader@d.o ]
> In contrast, the patent FAQ at
> http://www.debian.org/reports/patent-faq
> is good.
>
> So, who, in particular, wrote the patent policy at
> http://www.debian.org/legal/patent
The same people who wrote the patent FAQ, i.e. Debian legal counsel via
SPI, at SFLC. There is no contradiction between the two documents.
Each one of us is free to *think* that a piece of software in the Debian
archive is "patent encumbered", whatever that means, and possibly
thinking so due to the legitimate interests of patent owners that want
*everybody* to think pieces of software are encumbered by their own
patents (it is like asking the restaurant owner if the food is good,
right?).
But until it is proven that the specific version of a software we
distribute in Debian is in violation of some patents, I *personally*
don't think we have reasons to believe it is the case. Nor we have any
interest to look into it (which is sad, but that is pretty much what the
patent system induces people to do).
I also duly notice that, while discussing general matters is fine,
discussing specific issues is in violation of what the patent-faq
recommends Free Software projects to do.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences ...... http://upsilon.cc/zack ...... . . o
Debian Project Leader ....... @zack on identi.ca ....... o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Reply to: