Re: Status of uw-prism packaging for Debian

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Steve M. Robbins writes ("Re: Status of uw-prism packaging for Debian"):
> My guess is that the legality of distribution hinges on how the software is 
> represented.  For example, [1] defines "device" as:
> 
> 	any article, instrument, apparatus or contrivance, including any
> 	component, part or accessory thereof, manufactured, sold or represented
> 	for use in
> 
> 	a.    the diagnosis, treatment, mitigation or prevention of a disease,
> 	       disorder or abnormal physical sate, or its symptoms, in human
>                beings or animals,
> 
> 	... etc.
> 
> If the software makes no claim about diagnosis or treatment, perhaps it's 
> still OK, as in the Osirix case.

This sounds like it could be dealt with by appropriate wording in the
Description and/or documentation (eg manpages)

Ian.