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

Re: licensing question for "nom.tam.fits"

Le Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:26:29PM +0100, Francesco Poli a écrit :
> P.P.S.: I am not sure what you should write in the Copyright field for
> the upstream files, but "(c) 1996-2012 by Thomas A. McGlynn" does not
> look right, as long as the upstream work is really in the public domain
> (which, as you probably know, means that the work is *not* subject to
> copyright!)...
> The machine-readable debian/copyright file format specification v1.0
> (http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/)
> is not too clear on this point, unfortunately...
> Maybe you should ask on the debian-policy mailing list and suggest that
> this topic should be clarified in the specification.

Hi Francesco,

the 1.0 specification mentions for the Copyright field:

  If a work has no copyright holder (i.e., it is in the public domain), that
  information should be recorded here.

Inspecting Debian copyright files from
svn://anonscm.debian.org/collab-qa/packages-metadata/ I see that many chose
contents such as "none", "nobody", "public-domain", "not relevant", etc, which
I think are good enough, given that the content of the Copyright field is

Have a nice week-end,

Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan

Reply to: