Re: Problem regarding copyright of Moscow ML...
On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 11:55:15PM +0100, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> Hi :-)
>
> I have a little problem with "my" package Moscow ML - the following comes from
> copyrght.cl, which really is from CAML Light (which Moscow ML is based
> upon...):
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> b- Reproduction of the software:
>
> INRIA grants any user of the software the right to reproduce it so as
> to circulate it in accordance with the same purposes and conditions as
> those defined at point a- above. Any copy of the software and/or relevant
> documentation must comprise reference to the ownership of INRIA and
> the present file.
>
> >The user undertakes not to carry out any paying distribution of the
> >software. However, he is authorized to bill any person or body for the
> >cost of reproduction of said software. As regards any other type of
> distribution, the user undertakes to apply to obtain the express
> approval of INRIA.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> What should I do next? I think I'd try to contact the upstream maintainers to
> change this part of the copyright. But this file is from Moscow ML - do I have
> to contact the maintainer of Moscow ML to if INRIA removes this section from
> the copyright file?
It shoudl go into non-free, at least i think so.
i don't think you will have any luck in convincing the INRIA people to change
their licence, altough you could try. Myself i have been speaking with them
about the ocaml package, who has a almost dfsg compliant license, patch only,
but no binaries of modificated work permited. So we can not even distribut
debian package of it. the author (or at least one of them) said that he didn't
considered debianizing as modification of the package, and i was told that with
a notice from them in debian/copyright it should be ok to distribute it, but it
should still go into non free. Or did i misunderstood something.
I think they don't want someone using part of their virtual machine into a JVM
without some money going back to them, and since Java is quite hot right now, i
understand them quite well.
Friendly,
Sven LUTHER
Reply to: