Re: Custom license conditions and grant for Wordplay package
- To: Moshe Piekarski <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Cc: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Custom license conditions and grant for Wordplay package
- From: Ian Jackson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 2 May 2019 12:51:07 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] email@example.com>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <CACujMDMkPdKNjBxkjF4WLXpXtL+GmVj-JAQCyU9E7dGqGKx2XQ@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Moshe Piekarski writes ("Re: Custom license conditions and grant for Wordplay package"):
> The copyright holder made a statement on Facebook chat that he considers
> the code to be in the public domain. Is that enough for me to consider
> it such?
While legally in some jurisdictions there is no such thing as public
domain, I think the intent of the copyright holder - to grant very
broad permissions, certainly broad enough for Debian - is clear.
There is a difficulty with how we would provide evidence of this
statement if it came to that. Can you put a transcript and/or
(hopefully fairly small) screenshot into the source package ?
I don't use Facebook, so I will ask: How do you know that the Facebook
user in question is the same person as the copyright holder ?
Ian Jackson <email@example.com> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.