Hilmar, On Tuesday, September 17, 2024 2:56:53 PM MST Preuße, Hilmar wrote: > Hi, > > before pushing a broken package to the NEW queue: I started again > working on #698886 and have a here a package, which is quite lintian > clean. What causes headache is the license "Modified MIT license". > > The following paragraph has been added by the author: > > <snip> > If you copy or distribute a modified version of this Software, the > entire > resulting derived work must be given a different name and > distributed under > the terms of a permission notice identical to this one. > <snip> > > Except that it is a pure MIT license. Could that cause issues? I have copied the Debian Legal mailing list as this question is most directed toward their expertise. My initial impression is that this custom addition to the license isn’t a DFSG problem. It contains two parts: 1. It requires that any derivatives be given a different name. This is similar to trademark restrictions. Many, many packages in Debian have trademark restrictions that require derivatives to have different names (so end users are not confused as to which is the original package) and that is not considered a DFSG problem. 2. It requires that derivatives must use the same license. That isn’t a standard part of a MIT (Expat) license, but it is a standard part of other DFSG licenses (like the GPL), so I don’t think it would be a DFSG problem. -- Soren Stoutner soren@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.