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

Re: No source code for wesnoth-music



On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 10:38:34PM +0200, Mark Weyer wrote:
> > * Does distributing wesnoth-music without source code comply with its license (GPL 2+)?
> 
> No. The copyright holders can distribute their own work in any way they like,

No discussion here...


> but anybody else breaches the GPL 2 or 3 by not offering source code.

... but I tend to disagree at this point. Despite the possibility of
considering these file types as source code for the relevant purposes under
the circumstances, I am not sure we can talk about license violation from a
legal standpoint if the infringed requirement is that of redistribution of
something the redistributor never received (and, in this case, something
even the copyright holder could not provide, because it does not exist). This
should, at the very least, constitute grounds for exemption of liability.

Perhaps we would all be playing safer if upstream relicensed the affected
files accordingly, but I do not think that should be given much importance.

As for a possible DFSG violation, assuming from the considerations above that
the right to redistribute is not impaired, the last (and obviously not least)
remaining issue would be the requirement that "[t]he program must include
source code". In this context, I think such requirement is widely open to
interpretation, and I tend to think that considering wesnoth-music non-free
would be counter-productive and inconsistent with the principles outlined in
the Social Contract and with the remainder of the DFSG.

That, however, is merely a personal opinion, of which I am actually not quite
convinced. I look forward to hearing other people's comments on the issue.

--
Guilherme de Siqueira Pastore
gpastore@debian.org


Reply to: